From your own link "Free riding is considered an economic problem when it leads to the non-production or under-production of a public good". So unless there's actual evidence that the losses due to underproduction outweight the gains from some people being able to pirate it who wouldn't have otherwise bought it, then the net effect of piracy is positive.
Well, that, and the fact that the available spectrum is much larger. The entire 2.4 spectrum available for wifi is less than 100MHz wide, and that's including channels 12 and 13. With 5 and 5.8, you've got several hundreds of MHz available. Even if equipment with 160MHz channel widths becomes popular, there will still be more spectrum available than in 2.4.
It is still more convenient than port forwarding, because you could then have multiple such devices on each network without having to use alternate ports. Plus you could make it more secure by restricting what can connect to it from the other network (e.g. only allow connections to a videoconference device from videoconference devices on the other network).
If you need something to have a static IP, then you would do exactly as you would with IPv4: either set up a DHCPv6 reservation for that host, or configure it to use a static IP. Or link the DNS and DHCP so that no matter what IP it gets, the DNS record will be updated accordingly.
But that's the entire advantage of tabs. Everyone can set them up to display as the width they want to see. I like 3 space tabs, Alice likes 4, Bob likes 8. We can each set up our editors to our preferred width. Yes with a sufficiently advanced editor you could achieve the same with spaces, but that's needless complication.
But if your legitimate customers take up 10Gb/s of bandwidth at peak times, while the DDoSers have 500Gb/s they can clog your pipe with, does it really make sense to build 50x the capacity that you would otherwise ever need just to foil an occasional DDoS attack? I don't buy 50 cars just in case the other 49 get stolen.
Yes. It does suck. It's possible to learn it, just as it's possible to learn to ride one of those funny bikes that has the handlebars connected to the front wheel via a pair of cogs, so that turning left makes you turn right. It's possible to learn it, and even become proficient, and possibly even to make an argument that it's better for some definition of the word. But it still sucks.
Not a good comparison at all, because such a bike offers zero advantage even if you become proficient at it. Whereas someone proficient in vim or emacs is far more efficient than someone using a "better UX" editor.
I just put them in a mail folder. Make a new email account for them if you want. Then you still get the benefit of being able to access them on-demand anywhere through IMAP.
The stupid part of the whole thing is that I already had a mobile authenticator: it sends the code to my email and I can read the email on my phone. Hell, it's a lot easier and faster to open the always-running-in-the-background mail app than find the Steam app, wait for it to load, and get the code from it.
I'll start:
How could they donate money to an organization called "bro"? That's a completely sexist name and Mozilla shouldn't support this kind of misogyny!/s
Come to think of it, it's actually really sad that I have to put a/s on that, lest someone take this kind of sarcasm seriously a la this.
What would be nice about an MS-supported Linux distro is that it could finally get Windows off of ATMs and other places where it really doesn't belong.
No, I'm talking about certain items (usually in-game items) that can't be traded, but can be gifted once. Thus the only way to actually trade (i.e. get something in return) is by arranging to gift each other the items.
What's happening is Valve has done a 180. The entire reason they introduce certain features (such as the market) is to provide an official, difficult-to-get-scammed way of doing things so that people won't have to go to untrustworthy third parties.
But then, they started implementing more and more restrictions on these things. e.g. the only way to trade certain things is to "gift" them which is a one-way transaction where the only guarantee that the other party will actually follow through is the word of an anonymous stranger on the Internet. The best way to reduce the amount of scamming is by not forcing users to third party or other seedy methods of trading to begin with.
You already had to be a complete and utter moron to actually get scammed. It doesn't matter how idiot-proof they make it, someone will make a better idiot.
Also, another reason why there's so much scamming on services like Steam is that while the amount of money you'd get would be considered less than peanuts in any first world country, in other places it might amount to something decent. So as technology spreads, you get more online petty theft.
But the alternative sucks even more. If a web page wants to allow keyboard shortcuts, then it has to not conflict with the browser's shortcuts. I've been annoyed far too many days back in the flash days where I hit Ctrl-T or Ctrl-W but nope, the flash plugin grabbed it. One thing Windows does well hotkey-wise is it put all the OS shortcuts on Win+____ and nothing conflicts with them. Browsers, on the other hand, both use Ctrl+___ and Alt+___ for their hotkeys, so anything that wants to use those within the browser has to be very conservative with what it uses, or at least let the user remap them.
Amusingly, Intel could have glibly put every cooling system manufacture on a list of warranty-terminating equipment ages ago. They could have said, "Hey, we tested all these EXXXTREME COOLING jet fans and they dump 120psi onto our chips like the Hulk putting our balls in a vice. You strap that to the CPU and it fails, we're not responsible." It's fair for Intel to claim that unknown third-party equipment can destroy their hardware; can they quality control third-party equipment? They could, and they could stamp their name on it. That's how motherboards are made, and the board manufacturer is still liable if their board is mis-manufactured (now, if Intel passes the design and the design is flawed, Intel's certification makes Intel liable--Intel is negligent here; if the manufacturing is not within tolerance to produce properly-working equipment and it pumps out flawed boards, it's the manufacturer's fault).
They could try to, but ultimately it would be rather unenforceable. When the guy on the phone asks you what heatsink you used, you could just tell him you used the stock heatsink. There's a huge list of things that technically void your warranty, but (a) you don't have to tell them that you did those things or used certain pieces of equipment (b) they don't care half the time, half because of (a), the other half because it would just piss people off.
A benchmark (or any load) can only push the CPU so hard. Saying that throttling under load is okay is like saying that it's okay for your car's 5th gear to be broken because you never happen to use it. If something can't do something that it was specced to do, that's a problem.
But it doesn't - the color modifier is a combining character. Just like how despite having à, á, â, and ä in unicode, you can form identical looking letters by doing a normal "a" plus a combining acute, a combining grave, a combining umlaut, etc. So if you had 50 emojis and 5 skin colors, it would be 50 + 5 codepoints rather than 50 * 5.
1. Even if you wanted it to function exactly as it does with systemd, there's no reason for that functionality to be part of the same piece of software that provides your init system.
2. If something is a corner case, the nice part about linux/unix in general is that it's usually possible to hack around such a thing without demanding that other people make changes to their software. In this case, a simple 'alias suspend-command="lock-command && suspend-command"' would suffice. Requires 1 whole line in a bashrc somewhere rather than replacing an entire chunk of the system.
Thanks a lot, I just realized everything I compile on my OS is monolithic. Actually, there's not a single package on a Linux system that is not monolithic.
I'm not even talking about my DE which combine several monolithic packages. Even sysvinit was monolithic actually.
So systemd actually merges perfectly in all this monolithic mess of a system that Linux is.
Or perhaps you're wrong, because I can install systemd non-init stuff on a sysvinit system just fine.
Are you missing the point on purpose? Last time I checked, you could easily pick and choose parts of a DE to install, or what parts of a complete linux distro you wanted to install. Show me where the choice to have only systemd's init system without the other stuff is.
Oh my god, reading the various links would have told you that your 2, 3 and 4 points are kludges today that don't work well, if at all.
Systemd solves every single one of the problems listed in points 2, 3 and 4.
Really? They're kludges that don't work well at all? I've just been imagining my suspend working perfectly fine this whole time?
And there's still no reason why, if we want a power management system that provides inhibition locks, that that subsystem needs to be rolled into some monolithic "init" system. For the most part, people don't take issue with any individual part of systemd, they have a problem with the fact that the other crap has no place in something that claims to be an init system.
You don't want closing the lid to automatically sleep the system?
As a matter of fact, I don't. But that's irrelevant. That kind of stuff was already handled by existing stuff. You could make it so that closing the lid locks, sleeps, or locks and sleeps, all within programs that already existed and worked.
You think it's better if the desktop environment includes the code to put the computer to sleep? I thought you didn't want monolithic code, you want code split into separate areas of concern?
I never said the DE itself should handle anything low-level with sleep, just that it would tell some other program to put the computer to sleep. Programs which already existed and worked.
Many parts of systemd are just solutions looking for problems. Same as Pulse "it works except when it doesn't" Audio, 99% of systems have no need for Pulse, and there are probably more machines that run into bugs with Pulse with the stock config than without Pulse.
Slashdot Mirror
From your own link "Free riding is considered an economic problem when it leads to the non-production or under-production of a public good". So unless there's actual evidence that the losses due to underproduction outweight the gains from some people being able to pirate it who wouldn't have otherwise bought it, then the net effect of piracy is positive.
Well, that, and the fact that the available spectrum is much larger. The entire 2.4 spectrum available for wifi is less than 100MHz wide, and that's including channels 12 and 13. With 5 and 5.8, you've got several hundreds of MHz available. Even if equipment with 160MHz channel widths becomes popular, there will still be more spectrum available than in 2.4.
It is still more convenient than port forwarding, because you could then have multiple such devices on each network without having to use alternate ports. Plus you could make it more secure by restricting what can connect to it from the other network (e.g. only allow connections to a videoconference device from videoconference devices on the other network).
If you need something to have a static IP, then you would do exactly as you would with IPv4: either set up a DHCPv6 reservation for that host, or configure it to use a static IP. Or link the DNS and DHCP so that no matter what IP it gets, the DNS record will be updated accordingly.
But that's the entire advantage of tabs. Everyone can set them up to display as the width they want to see. I like 3 space tabs, Alice likes 4, Bob likes 8. We can each set up our editors to our preferred width. Yes with a sufficiently advanced editor you could achieve the same with spaces, but that's needless complication.
So, anyone who has contributed code to the Linux kernel?
But if your legitimate customers take up 10Gb/s of bandwidth at peak times, while the DDoSers have 500Gb/s they can clog your pipe with, does it really make sense to build 50x the capacity that you would otherwise ever need just to foil an occasional DDoS attack? I don't buy 50 cars just in case the other 49 get stolen.
Yes. It does suck. It's possible to learn it, just as it's possible to learn to ride one of those funny bikes that has the handlebars connected to the front wheel via a pair of cogs, so that turning left makes you turn right. It's possible to learn it, and even become proficient, and possibly even to make an argument that it's better for some definition of the word. But it still sucks.
Not a good comparison at all, because such a bike offers zero advantage even if you become proficient at it. Whereas someone proficient in vim or emacs is far more efficient than someone using a "better UX" editor.
I read TFS and thought "Hey, they forgot to put an article link" (as if anyone was going to RTFA). Then I realized who wrote it.
I just put them in a mail folder. Make a new email account for them if you want. Then you still get the benefit of being able to access them on-demand anywhere through IMAP.
If $400 is free for a business tool, then surely a $402 gigabit version would also be free.
A device released in 2015 with a pricetag of nearly $400 with modern goodies such as 802.11ac still only has 100mbps ethernet?
The stupid part of the whole thing is that I already had a mobile authenticator: it sends the code to my email and I can read the email on my phone. Hell, it's a lot easier and faster to open the always-running-in-the-background mail app than find the Steam app, wait for it to load, and get the code from it.
I'll start: /s
/s on that, lest someone take this kind of sarcasm seriously a la this.
How could they donate money to an organization called "bro"? That's a completely sexist name and Mozilla shouldn't support this kind of misogyny!
Come to think of it, it's actually really sad that I have to put a
What would be nice about an MS-supported Linux distro is that it could finally get Windows off of ATMs and other places where it really doesn't belong.
No, I'm talking about certain items (usually in-game items) that can't be traded, but can be gifted once. Thus the only way to actually trade (i.e. get something in return) is by arranging to gift each other the items.
What's happening is Valve has done a 180. The entire reason they introduce certain features (such as the market) is to provide an official, difficult-to-get-scammed way of doing things so that people won't have to go to untrustworthy third parties.
But then, they started implementing more and more restrictions on these things. e.g. the only way to trade certain things is to "gift" them which is a one-way transaction where the only guarantee that the other party will actually follow through is the word of an anonymous stranger on the Internet. The best way to reduce the amount of scamming is by not forcing users to third party or other seedy methods of trading to begin with.
You already had to be a complete and utter moron to actually get scammed. It doesn't matter how idiot-proof they make it, someone will make a better idiot.
Also, another reason why there's so much scamming on services like Steam is that while the amount of money you'd get would be considered less than peanuts in any first world country, in other places it might amount to something decent. So as technology spreads, you get more online petty theft.
But the alternative sucks even more. If a web page wants to allow keyboard shortcuts, then it has to not conflict with the browser's shortcuts. I've been annoyed far too many days back in the flash days where I hit Ctrl-T or Ctrl-W but nope, the flash plugin grabbed it. One thing Windows does well hotkey-wise is it put all the OS shortcuts on Win+____ and nothing conflicts with them. Browsers, on the other hand, both use Ctrl+___ and Alt+___ for their hotkeys, so anything that wants to use those within the browser has to be very conservative with what it uses, or at least let the user remap them.
I must have missed the part where my car manufacturer specced my car to run at the redline 24/7.
Amusingly, Intel could have glibly put every cooling system manufacture on a list of warranty-terminating equipment ages ago. They could have said, "Hey, we tested all these EXXXTREME COOLING jet fans and they dump 120psi onto our chips like the Hulk putting our balls in a vice. You strap that to the CPU and it fails, we're not responsible." It's fair for Intel to claim that unknown third-party equipment can destroy their hardware; can they quality control third-party equipment? They could, and they could stamp their name on it. That's how motherboards are made, and the board manufacturer is still liable if their board is mis-manufactured (now, if Intel passes the design and the design is flawed, Intel's certification makes Intel liable--Intel is negligent here; if the manufacturing is not within tolerance to produce properly-working equipment and it pumps out flawed boards, it's the manufacturer's fault).
They could try to, but ultimately it would be rather unenforceable. When the guy on the phone asks you what heatsink you used, you could just tell him you used the stock heatsink. There's a huge list of things that technically void your warranty, but (a) you don't have to tell them that you did those things or used certain pieces of equipment (b) they don't care half the time, half because of (a), the other half because it would just piss people off.
A benchmark (or any load) can only push the CPU so hard. Saying that throttling under load is okay is like saying that it's okay for your car's 5th gear to be broken because you never happen to use it. If something can't do something that it was specced to do, that's a problem.
But it doesn't - the color modifier is a combining character. Just like how despite having à, á, â, and ä in unicode, you can form identical looking letters by doing a normal "a" plus a combining acute, a combining grave, a combining umlaut, etc. So if you had 50 emojis and 5 skin colors, it would be 50 + 5 codepoints rather than 50 * 5.
1. Even if you wanted it to function exactly as it does with systemd, there's no reason for that functionality to be part of the same piece of software that provides your init system.
2. If something is a corner case, the nice part about linux/unix in general is that it's usually possible to hack around such a thing without demanding that other people make changes to their software. In this case, a simple 'alias suspend-command="lock-command && suspend-command"' would suffice. Requires 1 whole line in a bashrc somewhere rather than replacing an entire chunk of the system.
Thanks a lot, I just realized everything I compile on my OS is monolithic. Actually, there's not a single package on a Linux system that is not monolithic.
I'm not even talking about my DE which combine several monolithic packages. Even sysvinit was monolithic actually.
So systemd actually merges perfectly in all this monolithic mess of a system that Linux is.
Or perhaps you're wrong, because I can install systemd non-init stuff on a sysvinit system just fine.
Are you missing the point on purpose? Last time I checked, you could easily pick and choose parts of a DE to install, or what parts of a complete linux distro you wanted to install. Show me where the choice to have only systemd's init system without the other stuff is.
Oh my god, reading the various links would have told you that your 2, 3 and 4 points are kludges today that don't work well, if at all.
Systemd solves every single one of the problems listed in points 2, 3 and 4.
Really? They're kludges that don't work well at all? I've just been imagining my suspend working perfectly fine this whole time?
And there's still no reason why, if we want a power management system that provides inhibition locks, that that subsystem needs to be rolled into some monolithic "init" system. For the most part, people don't take issue with any individual part of systemd, they have a problem with the fact that the other crap has no place in something that claims to be an init system.
You don't want closing the lid to automatically sleep the system?
As a matter of fact, I don't. But that's irrelevant. That kind of stuff was already handled by existing stuff. You could make it so that closing the lid locks, sleeps, or locks and sleeps, all within programs that already existed and worked.
You think it's better if the desktop environment includes the code to put the computer to sleep? I thought you didn't want monolithic code, you want code split into separate areas of concern?
I never said the DE itself should handle anything low-level with sleep, just that it would tell some other program to put the computer to sleep. Programs which already existed and worked.
Many parts of systemd are just solutions looking for problems. Same as Pulse "it works except when it doesn't" Audio, 99% of systems have no need for Pulse, and there are probably more machines that run into bugs with Pulse with the stock config than without Pulse.