Has anyone ever mentioned to you that using a fixed-width font is very jarring, and makes it look like you're yelling (or at least suffer from voice immodulation syndrome:). You might as well just post in ALL CAPS, except of course the lameness filter won't let you.
Ow, my eyes hurt now...
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
I respectfully submit that if you thought that was off-topic, maybe you just didn't get it. See, the joke is that you can complain about the free market all you want (and many do, often for legitimate reasons) but in the end it consistently provides you with more value than any other economic system has done so far. Because in the end, we all like cheap orange juice.
I guess I've just never seen "free-marketer" used in such a pejorative fashion before. For a moment there I thought I was in Russia of 30 years ago or China of 20 years ago.
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
That's funny, I thought MLK Jr. using "I Have a Dream" to hawk networking gear was possibly the least tasteful thing I've ever seen on TV (and I sat through Iran-Contra and parts of the impeachment, too). I don't really care what happens to the images of Astaire, Wayne, or Gehrig - they were entertainers to begin with, so in a sense they've already sold their souls. But Mr. King was a spiritual leader and (in the broader sense) a statesman. If you can (in a sense) put words in his mouth, then there really is nothing sacred.
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
Similar copyright wars occurred in Greg Bear's Slant, which perhaps coincidentally mentioned disputes over Fred Astaire IIRC. Of course, these celebrity likenesses could walk around and interact with passersby as holograms, but it's almost the same thing:)
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
That's almost more scary. In a sense, the blatant promotion was an artistic (if one can say that about an Adam Sandler movie) part of the movie - it was overdone because it was a parody of sports stars hawking merchandise on TV. You could argue that toning that down really changes the movie, in which case the original producers might have a problem with it.
Not to mention that if Subway paid for product placement in the movie, they paid for that placement every time the movie was shown.
On the other hand, maybe if advertisers realize that their ads in movies aren't permanent, they'll give up on the idea:)
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
I have no problems with people deciding that Linux isn't for them, but the previous comment was along the lines of "I don't care if it's better, I still won't use it". That's the only thing that raised my eyebrows, it seemed incongruous for someone otherwise known as a power user.
On the topic of Quicken, you might be interested in GnuCash, which I've found a pretty good general checkbook replacement with a lot of other neat stuff too. Financial exchange with banking institutions is one of the medium-range goals for the tool, so that might be available sometime after the imminent stable 1.6 release. As far as whether your bank will let you connect with it, well, I'm not sure how they would tell that it's not Quicken on Windows - the protocols they use (like OFX, etc.) are standardized.
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
That's probably what I was thinking of; my system was at one point a stock Mandrake system. Now if you're installing RPMs that aren't from Mandrake, you've still got problems, and I agree that some sort of common handling of this would be nice. Although it appears that Gnome includes the KDE menu hierarchy too, and I would expect that the reverse would be true too, so anything that tries to install a launcher will get into your (foot/K) menu somewhere. It would be nice to have a little more control over where, though.
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
That's sort of a tangent, since the described uses were definitely not device-like, but here goes anyway:
At the most basic level, you have to care about what you are doing. If you care about what you are doing, you are interested in doing it the best way possible. If you are interested in doing something the best way possible, and the best way possible happens to be under Linux, then you use Linux for those things. If the best way possible happens to be under Windows, you use Windows for thoose things.
The difference is that Linux users seem to be more highly motivated to make Linux a better way, by helping out to make Linux a better and better way to do more and more things. Windows users (to tar with a very large brush) tend to take what they're given, and upgrade when they're told. "Taking what you're given" seems to me to be pretty far from "making it better".
Sure, if you just want to use a device, then that's not really an issue. If you don't care how well things work, then it's not a big deal. But if you're the "power user" as the poster above referred to, yet you're not interested in using the best tool for the job, you might have a little cognitive dissonance. Nobody said anything about rituals and ablutions, but if you want to get the most out of your device, then you can't just rule out Linux without due consideration.
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
Amazing - my post made it back to the normal +1 via an "underrated" moderation, just to get smacked down again with "overrated"! I again point out the political nature of those marking this post as "overrated" - if I'm posting at my normal score of 1, and making a reasonable arguement free of flame and troll, there's no justifiable reason to moderate it down as "overrated" since it was never up-rated in the first place.
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
It takes you four days to set up a Windows client? I'm not sure if I'm more puzzled by your ineptitude or disturbed by the superiority apparently born of it. All you would have to do is set up one Linux client correctly, and then clone the others off of it and update network settings. You would only be bound by the time it takes to physically copy the disk drive. You only have to spend time to set it up once (although I'll admit that this is probably possible with Windows, but it sounds like you're doing your current windows installs the very hard way, so anything would be an improvement:)
All my users can easily and quickly sit down to any machine and
recognize it. They're not confused about some > or a bash2.04> prompt.
Oh wait - never mind, I thought you were speaking from some experience with a Linux desktop, but now I see you were just joking about that. Why don't you troll elsewhere until you can actually put together a convincing one?
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
You can click on.rpm files in any number of file managers and have them do their thing, you know.
I wouldn't waste my time arguing with anyone that starts off with "I don't care if it's better", though - that's so far from the Linux philosophy that never the twain shall meet. I've been fortunate that my wife actually listens (and mostly understands) when I try to explain why I prefer Linux, but I guess that not everyone is so blessed:)
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
But Peacefire wasn't spamming, to my knowledge at least. There is no effect in spamming to remove Peacefire from the 'net, so this still doesn't make sense.
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
Overrated? It was posted with the normal score of 1, and had never been moderated up. That was a very cheap shot indeed - maybe you should grow up and learn to live with those with whom you disagree. C'mon, meta-moderation!
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
If the RBL is activity- and method-driven, why are they disrupting HTTP and other types of protocols too, even from those who haven't engaged in any of the activities and methods of spamming? No matter what the motivation, this smacks of "we had to destroy the village to save it", which might even be OK if people actually got the choice of whether to use a service provider with such a policy.
I fail to see how it's martyrdom for Peacefire to want to retain their existing setup, especially in the face of actions which would first strong-arm them entirely off of the 'net, and then offer PF a chance to relocate as some sort of backhanded favor. Regardless of the issue at hand that sort of presumption would make me dig in my heels. Would you like it if I destroyed your street tonight, but offered you free housing in an apartment complex I own?
If spam is oppressive, then by all means fight spam if you want. If other people want you to help them fight spam, then go right ahead and help them out. But don't do me the favor of fighting off the whole Internet, the good parts and the spam parts, with no warning to and no consent from me. I reserve my own right to decide whether the lack of spam is worth losing access to some of the good things on the 'net. For Abovenet to make that choice for me is unethical, but for them to make that choice and not even let me know that they're censoring whom I can communicate with is frankly criminal.
I'm sorry that things have come to this, because for a long time I was an RBL defender - it's a good tool, it mostly works, and it does force change for the better quickly. But throwing out the baby with the bath water is rapidly going to efface any goodwill towards the RBL in the 'net community, even more so when people find out that the choice has been made for them without any hint that their connectivity has been diminished.
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
The user has a choice if they know their SMTP server is filtered and their web browser isn't going to be able to see certain sites. If they know this, they can choose not to connect through Abovenet. It is the lack of knowledge that is the problem, not a fundamental lack of choice. Whether most people prefer this or not has nothing to do with whether all people should be made aware of such policies on the part of their ISP.
Regardless of how easy it is to get off of the RBL, the fact is that some users had their 'net access curtailed for reasons that they may or may not agree with without their knowledge. I don't like spam either, but the ends don't justify the means. Use the RBL by all means, but provide users with a way to not use it if they don't want to, or at least with the knowledge to know not to get their connectivity from Abovenet.
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
The only problem is that the users didn't really get a choice as to whether those sites should be blocked or not. They can't pressure Abovenet to use or not use the RBL if they don't know of its use in the first place.
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
Well, if we're connected through Abovenet, then yes, someone controls my inbox and your inbox, and in this case they even control our web browsers. The only question is whether we prefer them to have this control, or not. But if there's no indication that Abovenet does this sort of blackholing, then there can't really be a choice on the user's part as to whether they prefer Abovenet or not, can there? Membership for those users is not voluntary, because they don't know they're members.
I believe in the RBL, but I don't believe in giving them total power. The RBL is a great tool if you choose to use it, but users should have that choice to make and should know that they have such a choice.
Of course better oversight on the part of Vixie & co. wouldn't hurt either, but as long as users have a choice then any overzealousness will just come home to roost as users desert the RBL, so that's really just a secondary problem.
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
I agree - give it a try for a day or so and see if you feel more efficient. I made the switch a year or two ago after reading yet another carpal-tunnel-owns-your-wrists article here, and have never looked back (heck, it might've been the parent post's author who gave me the idea, in which case I say "Thanks!"). It may not be for Emacs users (see post above), but since I'm a vi guy it works great. It also really confuses coworkers who try to use your workstation:)
The only bad thing is that if you then go into a "normal" computer lab with all the mice on the right of the keyboard, you'll be grabbing for someone else's mouse until you train your left hand to stay put.
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
After years of wondering, I finally have to ask: do you ridiculopathy folks ever try to make a connection between the text of a link, and the stories that are actually on RP at the time? Most of the time there seems to be no connection, just some random words at the end of a post made into a link.
It's almost as annoying as all the monospaced people.:)
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
Slashdot Mirror
Good point - imagine Mr. King exclaiming the praises of his Colt 45...*shudder* It could have been much worse.
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
Has anyone ever mentioned to you that using a fixed-width font is very jarring, and makes it look like you're yelling (or at least suffer from voice immodulation syndrome :). You might as well just post in ALL CAPS, except of course the lameness filter won't let you.
Ow, my eyes hurt now...
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
I respectfully submit that if you thought that was off-topic, maybe you just didn't get it. See, the joke is that you can complain about the free market all you want (and many do, often for legitimate reasons) but in the end it consistently provides you with more value than any other economic system has done so far. Because in the end, we all like cheap orange juice.
I guess I've just never seen "free-marketer" used in such a pejorative fashion before. For a moment there I thought I was in Russia of 30 years ago or China of 20 years ago.
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
Contrariwise, every day I can download a paper in PS or PDF and not in Word is a good day.
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
That's funny, I thought MLK Jr. using "I Have a Dream" to hawk networking gear was possibly the least tasteful thing I've ever seen on TV (and I sat through Iran-Contra and parts of the impeachment, too). I don't really care what happens to the images of Astaire, Wayne, or Gehrig - they were entertainers to begin with, so in a sense they've already sold their souls. But Mr. King was a spiritual leader and (in the broader sense) a statesman. If you can (in a sense) put words in his mouth, then there really is nothing sacred.
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
Similar copyright wars occurred in Greg Bear's Slant, which perhaps coincidentally mentioned disputes over Fred Astaire IIRC. Of course, these celebrity likenesses could walk around and interact with passersby as holograms, but it's almost the same thing :)
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
That's almost more scary. In a sense, the blatant promotion was an artistic (if one can say that about an Adam Sandler movie) part of the movie - it was overdone because it was a parody of sports stars hawking merchandise on TV. You could argue that toning that down really changes the movie, in which case the original producers might have a problem with it.
Not to mention that if Subway paid for product placement in the movie, they paid for that placement every time the movie was shown.
On the other hand, maybe if advertisers realize that their ads in movies aren't permanent, they'll give up on the idea :)
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
I hate to tell you, but I'm pretty sure Hans Reiser is male. The hint was when the interviewer called him "Mr. Reiser".
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
I have no problems with people deciding that Linux isn't for them, but the previous comment was along the lines of "I don't care if it's better, I still won't use it". That's the only thing that raised my eyebrows, it seemed incongruous for someone otherwise known as a power user.
On the topic of Quicken, you might be interested in GnuCash, which I've found a pretty good general checkbook replacement with a lot of other neat stuff too. Financial exchange with banking institutions is one of the medium-range goals for the tool, so that might be available sometime after the imminent stable 1.6 release. As far as whether your bank will let you connect with it, well, I'm not sure how they would tell that it's not Quicken on Windows - the protocols they use (like OFX, etc.) are standardized.
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
That's probably what I was thinking of; my system was at one point a stock Mandrake system. Now if you're installing RPMs that aren't from Mandrake, you've still got problems, and I agree that some sort of common handling of this would be nice. Although it appears that Gnome includes the KDE menu hierarchy too, and I would expect that the reverse would be true too, so anything that tries to install a launcher will get into your (foot/K) menu somewhere. It would be nice to have a little more control over where, though.
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
That's sort of a tangent, since the described uses were definitely not device-like, but here goes anyway:
At the most basic level, you have to care about what you are doing. If you care about what you are doing, you are interested in doing it the best way possible. If you are interested in doing something the best way possible, and the best way possible happens to be under Linux, then you use Linux for those things. If the best way possible happens to be under Windows, you use Windows for thoose things.
The difference is that Linux users seem to be more highly motivated to make Linux a better way, by helping out to make Linux a better and better way to do more and more things. Windows users (to tar with a very large brush) tend to take what they're given, and upgrade when they're told. "Taking what you're given" seems to me to be pretty far from "making it better".
Sure, if you just want to use a device, then that's not really an issue. If you don't care how well things work, then it's not a big deal. But if you're the "power user" as the poster above referred to, yet you're not interested in using the best tool for the job, you might have a little cognitive dissonance. Nobody said anything about rituals and ablutions, but if you want to get the most out of your device, then you can't just rule out Linux without due consideration.
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
Amazing - my post made it back to the normal +1 via an "underrated" moderation, just to get smacked down again with "overrated"! I again point out the political nature of those marking this post as "overrated" - if I'm posting at my normal score of 1, and making a reasonable arguement free of flame and troll, there's no justifiable reason to moderate it down as "overrated" since it was never up-rated in the first place.
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
Sounds like somebody's jealous :)
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
It takes you four days to set up a Windows client? I'm not sure if I'm more puzzled by your ineptitude or disturbed by the superiority apparently born of it. All you would have to do is set up one Linux client correctly, and then clone the others off of it and update network settings. You would only be bound by the time it takes to physically copy the disk drive. You only have to spend time to set it up once (although I'll admit that this is probably possible with Windows, but it sounds like you're doing your current windows installs the very hard way, so anything would be an improvement :)
Oh wait - never mind, I thought you were speaking from some experience with a Linux desktop, but now I see you were just joking about that. Why don't you troll elsewhere until you can actually put together a convincing one?
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
You can click on .rpm files in any number of file managers and have them do their thing, you know.
I wouldn't waste my time arguing with anyone that starts off with "I don't care if it's better", though - that's so far from the Linux philosophy that never the twain shall meet. I've been fortunate that my wife actually listens (and mostly understands) when I try to explain why I prefer Linux, but I guess that not everyone is so blessed :)
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
But Peacefire wasn't spamming, to my knowledge at least. There is no effect in spamming to remove Peacefire from the 'net, so this still doesn't make sense.
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
Overrated? It was posted with the normal score of 1, and had never been moderated up. That was a very cheap shot indeed - maybe you should grow up and learn to live with those with whom you disagree. C'mon, meta-moderation!
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
If the RBL is activity- and method-driven, why are they disrupting HTTP and other types of protocols too, even from those who haven't engaged in any of the activities and methods of spamming? No matter what the motivation, this smacks of "we had to destroy the village to save it", which might even be OK if people actually got the choice of whether to use a service provider with such a policy.
I fail to see how it's martyrdom for Peacefire to want to retain their existing setup, especially in the face of actions which would first strong-arm them entirely off of the 'net, and then offer PF a chance to relocate as some sort of backhanded favor. Regardless of the issue at hand that sort of presumption would make me dig in my heels. Would you like it if I destroyed your street tonight, but offered you free housing in an apartment complex I own?
If spam is oppressive, then by all means fight spam if you want. If other people want you to help them fight spam, then go right ahead and help them out. But don't do me the favor of fighting off the whole Internet, the good parts and the spam parts, with no warning to and no consent from me. I reserve my own right to decide whether the lack of spam is worth losing access to some of the good things on the 'net. For Abovenet to make that choice for me is unethical, but for them to make that choice and not even let me know that they're censoring whom I can communicate with is frankly criminal.
I'm sorry that things have come to this, because for a long time I was an RBL defender - it's a good tool, it mostly works, and it does force change for the better quickly. But throwing out the baby with the bath water is rapidly going to efface any goodwill towards the RBL in the 'net community, even more so when people find out that the choice has been made for them without any hint that their connectivity has been diminished.
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
The user has a choice if they know their SMTP server is filtered and their web browser isn't going to be able to see certain sites. If they know this, they can choose not to connect through Abovenet. It is the lack of knowledge that is the problem, not a fundamental lack of choice. Whether most people prefer this or not has nothing to do with whether all people should be made aware of such policies on the part of their ISP.
Regardless of how easy it is to get off of the RBL, the fact is that some users had their 'net access curtailed for reasons that they may or may not agree with without their knowledge. I don't like spam either, but the ends don't justify the means. Use the RBL by all means, but provide users with a way to not use it if they don't want to, or at least with the knowledge to know not to get their connectivity from Abovenet.
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
The only problem is that the users didn't really get a choice as to whether those sites should be blocked or not. They can't pressure Abovenet to use or not use the RBL if they don't know of its use in the first place.
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
Well, if we're connected through Abovenet, then yes, someone controls my inbox and your inbox, and in this case they even control our web browsers. The only question is whether we prefer them to have this control, or not. But if there's no indication that Abovenet does this sort of blackholing, then there can't really be a choice on the user's part as to whether they prefer Abovenet or not, can there? Membership for those users is not voluntary, because they don't know they're members.
I believe in the RBL, but I don't believe in giving them total power. The RBL is a great tool if you choose to use it, but users should have that choice to make and should know that they have such a choice.
Of course better oversight on the part of Vixie & co. wouldn't hurt either, but as long as users have a choice then any overzealousness will just come home to roost as users desert the RBL, so that's really just a secondary problem.
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
*grin* touché!
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
Just what the world needs - a mouse you can never find when your computer really wants you to... :)
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
I agree - give it a try for a day or so and see if you feel more efficient. I made the switch a year or two ago after reading yet another carpal-tunnel-owns-your-wrists article here, and have never looked back (heck, it might've been the parent post's author who gave me the idea, in which case I say "Thanks!"). It may not be for Emacs users (see post above), but since I'm a vi guy it works great. It also really confuses coworkers who try to use your workstation :)
The only bad thing is that if you then go into a "normal" computer lab with all the mice on the right of the keyboard, you'll be grabbing for someone else's mouse until you train your left hand to stay put.
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
After years of wondering, I finally have to ask: do you ridiculopathy folks ever try to make a connection between the text of a link, and the stories that are actually on RP at the time? Most of the time there seems to be no connection, just some random words at the end of a post made into a link.
It's almost as annoying as all the monospaced people. :)
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!