Yes you can install the latest version alongside the existing stock version. It's always a good idea to keep the old working version around should you encounter any bugs in the new version. Just grab the latest deb packages from libreoffice.org.
Are you serious? It's 2016 and the rage is cloud computing with distributed virtual machines and containers all running programs. You better believe remoting and network transparency is in demand, and actually essential. Apps could be local in a docker container or on the cloud. All interfaced on a laptop or tablet together seamlessly. Really it's the old 1990s Sun vision actually materializing.
RDP indeed is a very good protocol. It's very fast, much faster than X11 forwarding, and can forward files, printers, and sounds across the link. Typically it's faster than VNC too. At one time there was talk about making a wayland module that would use RDP as the underlying protocol to remote Wayland windows and applications across the network. This actually makes more sense to me than forwarding the wayland protocol itself. RDP can do per-app forwarding (like we're used to on Linux), or the full desktop.
Service providers continue to maintain that caps are about congestion and infrastructure. This move proves that the network has plenty of bandwidth and is plenty robust. So when the FCC comes calling they can't use this as an excuse for why they have caps on their "unlimited" plans. This type of thing is very hard to defend logically, but I'm sure they'll find a way to make up something that sounds reasonable.
And actually caps of any kind can't be justified by network infrastructure since if there's bandwidth to let everyone download up to, say, 300 GB a month, all at the same time and at full speed, there's bandwidth for everyone to download as much as they want at full speed.
To the new slashdot owners, when you finally get around to supporting utf-8, how about lengthening the subject line to at least another dozen characters!
Put the "read more" link back after the story summary. Also put the comment count down there again. See soylent news for an example of how it use to be.
Also a couple of years ago slashdot had a wonderful mobile site that looked very much like the desktop site, but was extremely functional (commenting, moderating, filtering comments, everything). The latest mobile site is useless as far as I'm concerned. In fact I the desktop site is more usable on a phone than the current mobile site. Slashdot is not Ars Technica. Slashdot *is* the comments. The stories are just there to spur discussion.
Also any regenerative hardware will have to be physically attached to the wheels adding all kinds of rational inertia to the wheels. Landing is already hard on wheels as they go from a dead stop to spinning in a second. The generator hardware would make the tires take more load during this critical moment.
Yes, but that point is farther in the future than most people who are pushing batteries will admit. Internal combustion engines of all kinds will be viable for years to come. Even with the thermal efficiency capped by the laws of physics, the energy density of hydrocarbons is so great and the infrastructure to handle it so easy, it is still a winner over batteries and electrics. Pollution will always be a concern, though, but CO2 need not be, as hydrocarbons may be a convenient way to store renewable, carbon-neutral energy.
They may be thinking outside the box, but I'm skeptical. The equipment needed to capture braking energy adds weight. Everything is paid for with fuel. Years ago engineers wondered if there was some way to spin the wheels before touchdown, reducing tire wear and heat but they found it just wasn't worth it. I suspect we'll find the same thing here. A better idea may be to have electric vehicles grab the airplane after it exits the runway and pull it to the gate.
Doesn't look like the mods understood what the article was talking about anymore than you did! This isn't about bitcoins. It's about the technology for doing a trustrworthy and tamper-proof ledger of transactions between parties that need not have any trust for each other. The article contains at least one good use for the blockchain: land deeds.
What do you think of soylent news? When they started they billed themselves as continuing the ideal of what Slashdot used to be. Personally I don't find the stories and comments to be all that great on soylent. Slashdot still wins by a very small amount in my opinion.
You are confused. I'm not sure why you were modded up here. NetworkManager is not part of systemd, and doesn't require systemd either. Your linux machines have been using it for years, several years longer than systemd has ever existed. Please get your facts straight before posting.
Sounds like your knee jerked and you mistook NetworkManager for networkd, which is a part of systemd. But networkd is intended only to provide simple network functionality for containers like Docker or virtual machines. networkd is not required, and I've never ever used it on my boxes and I've run systemd for years. I don't even think I have it installed (yes systemd really is modular and you can remove parts of it).
Possibly networkd could become a backend for NetworkManager, but so far I don't think that's the case. And NewtorkManager seems to handle hotplugging of devices with ease (like Wifi dongles or ethernet dongles).
NetworkManager is great for managing things like WiFi, VPNs, and multiple TCP/IP configurations. For example, I keep a special NetworkManager profile for connecting to my Ubuiquiti Wifi devices for the first time. The profile uses a static IP address like 192.168.1.10. For my normal connections, DHCP is used. NetworkManager is very powerful, and there's a nice command-line utility to interface with it as well. It used to be quite embarrassing for many years on Linux that even something as simple as plugging in a ethernet wire would not automatically bring up the interface like Windows and Mac had done for years. NetworkManager was a welcome piece of the puzzle.
Sorry, you lost me there. How is this even remotely related to the ongoing Windows 10 forced upgrade? Linux users by and large *want* to upgrade. And they do so regularly without losing major functionality. Even when the desktop GUI changes, say to Gnome 3, there's still Mate. Heck even KDE 3 is still available in some form for those who really want it. I don't mind Linux upgrades at all compared to Windows, because generally-speaking I don't lose anything.
How is Linux Mint always catching instead of leading, and why is this bad? I'm afraid I'm not following your arguments at all here. You certainly don't have to know about any of this. Just keep on using your system and upgrade when you want. Mint is LTS. Though I think Mint is still nuke and pave I believe when you do want to upgrade. I personally don't care about leading or following. It does the job and that's the most important thing to me. That's why I run Linux.
Wood frame house, all on one level, drywall walls. The house was built in 1981; I have no idea what was in the paint back then. My brother just built a small house last year (two stories) and he definitely gets poor signal upstairs and 10 feet down the hall. Maybe it's just a crappy TP-Link Archer C7. 2.4GHz signal is great everywhere (and speeds are excellent) which is expected of course since 2.4 GHz penetrates better than 5 GHz. No heavy use generally, in fact nothing uses 5 Ghz right now since I can't even see the signal from my phone or laptop more than 20 feet and several walls away. Most of the computers are on wired connections. The odd laptop running. A couple of phones (no teenagers, just adults!). No gaming, no streaming (couldn't stream over 5 Ghz anyway with the signal not strong enough to even connect to sometimes).
Anyway, like I say, I'm happy enough with 2.4 GHz. We live in a quiet rural area with no signal congestion whatsoever (I can connect to the 2.4 GHz SSID up to 400 feet away outdoors even), so I can run 40 MHz bandwidth and use up two channels to get consistent transfer speeds nearly 100 Mbit/s. Plus I have gigabit ethernet to the desktop machines. But I am curious and it sounds like my experience is shared by some, but definitely not by others. So I am guessing the TP-Link Archer C7 just isn't that great of hardware for doing 802.11 AC on 5 GHz.
This house was built in '81. My brother's house, however, was built last year. Both aps are tp-link Archer c7s with separate ssids for each frequency. Was hoping to get better streaming from my server to the TV but unfortunately neither Chromecast or roku supports 5 ghz. Fortunately I live in a quiet area with no 2.4 ghz nearby so I can use 40 mhz 2.4 ghz and get consistent speeds almost 100 mbit so it's not a huge issue. But I was disappointed in the signal strength and the lack of support for 5 ghz in Chromecast.
I've got a cheaper dual band 802.11ac router in my house and I'm not very impressed with range on 5 ghz. In fact it only really works well in the same room. No other 5 ghz signals in the area except for a directional ubiquity device on the roof, which works great by the way. I know range in 5 ghz isn't great compared to 2.4 but are others having better luck in a home through walls? If this is supposed to be a viable option in congested 2.4 ghz environments, I wonder how people are using it. My brother had a similar experience with a dual band router also.
I've had systemd running on my linux machines for years now. Just seems to work and I am much happier to create a simple ini file to start a custom daemon than to mess with horrid, buggy, complex, and fragile init scripts.
And that's what XMPP was supposed to have fixed. XMPP was really about decentralization and federation. You simply didn't need an account with Google or any particular company to participate. Then Google decided to cut off federation with gmail, making what could have been a great, widely-used protocol, into something incredibly broken. It was this breaking of XMPP by Google (after years of promoting XMPP) that marked the beginning of the change from "don't be evil" into what it has become today.
I used to run my own Jabber server with my own domain, communicating with gmail users and others, and it worked lovely until Google decided to cut off access to their users. Suddenly my own server became nearly useless with all my non-techy friends suddenly unable to communicate. Sure I could have granted them all accounts on my server, but most of them had just used the google chat program, and switching them to something more open would be difficult for them, to say nothing of *their* friends who are on gmail anyway.
So XMPP is essentially dead, thanks to google and we are not better off for it, no matter what they want us to believe about Hangouts.
As with Windows, this is really up to the application. Windows apps store this information on the registry and then request that size and position on next launch. Linux apps often do similar things, at least with size. Many apps are poorly written. But quite a few seen to remember their last size. Position is harder to get right because users may use multiple desktops so fixing the position isn't always the right thing to do.
I suspect that with BASIC not relying on pointers at all for general function, security for IoT is probably a lot better than when C is used. I don't think your pessimistic comments about BASIC are really valid. Also this BASIC implementation is interpereted, so as long as the interpreter is secure with bounds checking, BASIC programs could well be very secure and correct, much more than many people's C sketches are in Arduino!
For those interested, there's a project called MicroPython that implements a full-featured Python 3 interpreter on a microprocessor. Like the BASIC chip it's interpreted so it's slower than bare C. But it does let you use all the niceness and rapid development capabilities of Python on a 32-bit microprocessor.
In Windows it's always been up to the application developer too, if I recall correctly. Many apps save this information in the registry. I don't think Windows itself does this for the apps.
What a silly comment. How would FAA regulation do anything in a case like this? The quadcopter was owned and operated by a commerical agency. So we already know who the operator is so they could already be fined for reckless behavior or otherwise sanctioned by the sporting organization. As you say, "pro drones" are really expensive so they aren't likely to be used by rank amateur idiots next to the white house or by an airport. How would FAA registration do anything helpful here?
I had no idea TV was like this. I haven't really watched any prime-time television in years now. Didn't know I was missing so much! Are the popular sitcoms and dramas like this also?
Yeah it definitely works, and they do produce enough amps and volts in the short term to crank an engine. However there's no way they can store the same number of amp-hours as a lead-acid battery.
Also they put a huge amount of strain on the alternator as they will draw a lot more amps charging rapidly than a lead acid battery typically does.
There are reasons why super capacitors aren't in widespread use in cars as a replacement for batteries, though they still hold some promise as an assistive technology.
Already VW and other companies are planning to go way into electric vehicles. And why wouldn't they want to? It's an easier and cheaper way of passing the EPA buck onto someone else. Instead of having to try to meet every stringent reg they can let someone else entirely (power companies) deal with that issue. And will they be able to deal with the issue either? Doubtful.
Everyone talks about how dishonest VW was. But strictly speaking, they followed the letter of the law as it was written. Obviously they violated the intent. But when it comes to tricky-to-follow laws, the letter of the law is where you'll go every time. They met the tests as the EPA required. The EPA moving to a more "real-world" testing system perhaps might be a tipping point. I honestly doubt there's an engine on the planet that really meets EPA pollution regs, and this real-world testing will soon find this out. I'm all for clean air, but the EPA and the public has been lulled into a false sense of what can be achieved. And what does "real world testing" mean anyway? Straight and level? Steady climb for 400 miles? It's a gong show.
For years the EPA and other interested parties have deluded the public into thinking we can have our cake and eat it too. We can drive cars as much as we want. And it's clean! In fact cars always will be about trade-offs. Risk and benefits. And nevermind net CO2, which isn't even part of this.
And electric doesn't actually help much because almost all diesel pollution is from heavy trucks which at present aren't really going to be made electric.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes you can install the latest version alongside the existing stock version. It's always a good idea to keep the old working version around should you encounter any bugs in the new version. Just grab the latest deb packages from libreoffice.org.
Are you serious? It's 2016 and the rage is cloud computing with distributed virtual machines and containers all running programs. You better believe remoting and network transparency is in demand, and actually essential. Apps could be local in a docker container or on the cloud. All interfaced on a laptop or tablet together seamlessly. Really it's the old 1990s Sun vision actually materializing.
RDP indeed is a very good protocol. It's very fast, much faster than X11 forwarding, and can forward files, printers, and sounds across the link. Typically it's faster than VNC too. At one time there was talk about making a wayland module that would use RDP as the underlying protocol to remote Wayland windows and applications across the network. This actually makes more sense to me than forwarding the wayland protocol itself. RDP can do per-app forwarding (like we're used to on Linux), or the full desktop.
Service providers continue to maintain that caps are about congestion and infrastructure. This move proves that the network has plenty of bandwidth and is plenty robust. So when the FCC comes calling they can't use this as an excuse for why they have caps on their "unlimited" plans. This type of thing is very hard to defend logically, but I'm sure they'll find a way to make up something that sounds reasonable.
And actually caps of any kind can't be justified by network infrastructure since if there's bandwidth to let everyone download up to, say, 300 GB a month, all at the same time and at full speed, there's bandwidth for everyone to download as much as they want at full speed.
To the new slashdot owners, when you finally get around to supporting utf-8, how about lengthening the subject line to at least another dozen characters!
Put the "read more" link back after the story summary. Also put the comment count down there again. See soylent news for an example of how it use to be.
Also a couple of years ago slashdot had a wonderful mobile site that looked very much like the desktop site, but was extremely functional (commenting, moderating, filtering comments, everything). The latest mobile site is useless as far as I'm concerned. In fact I the desktop site is more usable on a phone than the current mobile site. Slashdot is not Ars Technica. Slashdot *is* the comments. The stories are just there to spur discussion.
Also any regenerative hardware will have to be physically attached to the wheels adding all kinds of rational inertia to the wheels. Landing is already hard on wheels as they go from a dead stop to spinning in a second. The generator hardware would make the tires take more load during this critical moment.
Yes, but that point is farther in the future than most people who are pushing batteries will admit. Internal combustion engines of all kinds will be viable for years to come. Even with the thermal efficiency capped by the laws of physics, the energy density of hydrocarbons is so great and the infrastructure to handle it so easy, it is still a winner over batteries and electrics. Pollution will always be a concern, though, but CO2 need not be, as hydrocarbons may be a convenient way to store renewable, carbon-neutral energy.
They may be thinking outside the box, but I'm skeptical. The equipment needed to capture braking energy adds weight. Everything is paid for with fuel. Years ago engineers wondered if there was some way to spin the wheels before touchdown, reducing tire wear and heat but they found it just wasn't worth it. I suspect we'll find the same thing here. A better idea may be to have electric vehicles grab the airplane after it exits the runway and pull it to the gate.
Doesn't look like the mods understood what the article was talking about anymore than you did! This isn't about bitcoins. It's about the technology for doing a trustrworthy and tamper-proof ledger of transactions between parties that need not have any trust for each other. The article contains at least one good use for the blockchain: land deeds.
What do you think of soylent news? When they started they billed themselves as continuing the ideal of what Slashdot used to be. Personally I don't find the stories and comments to be all that great on soylent. Slashdot still wins by a very small amount in my opinion.
You are confused. I'm not sure why you were modded up here. NetworkManager is not part of systemd, and doesn't require systemd either. Your linux machines have been using it for years, several years longer than systemd has ever existed. Please get your facts straight before posting.
Sounds like your knee jerked and you mistook NetworkManager for networkd, which is a part of systemd. But networkd is intended only to provide simple network functionality for containers like Docker or virtual machines. networkd is not required, and I've never ever used it on my boxes and I've run systemd for years. I don't even think I have it installed (yes systemd really is modular and you can remove parts of it).
Possibly networkd could become a backend for NetworkManager, but so far I don't think that's the case. And NewtorkManager seems to handle hotplugging of devices with ease (like Wifi dongles or ethernet dongles).
NetworkManager is great for managing things like WiFi, VPNs, and multiple TCP/IP configurations. For example, I keep a special NetworkManager profile for connecting to my Ubuiquiti Wifi devices for the first time. The profile uses a static IP address like 192.168.1.10. For my normal connections, DHCP is used. NetworkManager is very powerful, and there's a nice command-line utility to interface with it as well. It used to be quite embarrassing for many years on Linux that even something as simple as plugging in a ethernet wire would not automatically bring up the interface like Windows and Mac had done for years. NetworkManager was a welcome piece of the puzzle.
Sorry, you lost me there. How is this even remotely related to the ongoing Windows 10 forced upgrade? Linux users by and large *want* to upgrade. And they do so regularly without losing major functionality. Even when the desktop GUI changes, say to Gnome 3, there's still Mate. Heck even KDE 3 is still available in some form for those who really want it. I don't mind Linux upgrades at all compared to Windows, because generally-speaking I don't lose anything.
How is Linux Mint always catching instead of leading, and why is this bad? I'm afraid I'm not following your arguments at all here. You certainly don't have to know about any of this. Just keep on using your system and upgrade when you want. Mint is LTS. Though I think Mint is still nuke and pave I believe when you do want to upgrade. I personally don't care about leading or following. It does the job and that's the most important thing to me. That's why I run Linux.
Yes maybe by 2020 will be the year of the Linux Desktop!
Wood frame house, all on one level, drywall walls. The house was built in 1981; I have no idea what was in the paint back then. My brother just built a small house last year (two stories) and he definitely gets poor signal upstairs and 10 feet down the hall. Maybe it's just a crappy TP-Link Archer C7. 2.4GHz signal is great everywhere (and speeds are excellent) which is expected of course since 2.4 GHz penetrates better than 5 GHz. No heavy use generally, in fact nothing uses 5 Ghz right now since I can't even see the signal from my phone or laptop more than 20 feet and several walls away. Most of the computers are on wired connections. The odd laptop running. A couple of phones (no teenagers, just adults!). No gaming, no streaming (couldn't stream over 5 Ghz anyway with the signal not strong enough to even connect to sometimes).
Anyway, like I say, I'm happy enough with 2.4 GHz. We live in a quiet rural area with no signal congestion whatsoever (I can connect to the 2.4 GHz SSID up to 400 feet away outdoors even), so I can run 40 MHz bandwidth and use up two channels to get consistent transfer speeds nearly 100 Mbit/s. Plus I have gigabit ethernet to the desktop machines. But I am curious and it sounds like my experience is shared by some, but definitely not by others. So I am guessing the TP-Link Archer C7 just isn't that great of hardware for doing 802.11 AC on 5 GHz.
This house was built in '81. My brother's house, however, was built last year. Both aps are tp-link Archer c7s with separate ssids for each frequency. Was hoping to get better streaming from my server to the TV but unfortunately neither Chromecast or roku supports 5 ghz. Fortunately I live in a quiet area with no 2.4 ghz nearby so I can use 40 mhz 2.4 ghz and get consistent speeds almost 100 mbit so it's not a huge issue. But I was disappointed in the signal strength and the lack of support for 5 ghz in Chromecast.
I've got a cheaper dual band 802.11ac router in my house and I'm not very impressed with range on 5 ghz. In fact it only really works well in the same room. No other 5 ghz signals in the area except for a directional ubiquity device on the roof, which works great by the way. I know range in 5 ghz isn't great compared to 2.4 but are others having better luck in a home through walls? If this is supposed to be a viable option in congested 2.4 ghz environments, I wonder how people are using it. My brother had a similar experience with a dual band router also.
I've had systemd running on my linux machines for years now. Just seems to work and I am much happier to create a simple ini file to start a custom daemon than to mess with horrid, buggy, complex, and fragile init scripts.
And that's what XMPP was supposed to have fixed. XMPP was really about decentralization and federation. You simply didn't need an account with Google or any particular company to participate. Then Google decided to cut off federation with gmail, making what could have been a great, widely-used protocol, into something incredibly broken. It was this breaking of XMPP by Google (after years of promoting XMPP) that marked the beginning of the change from "don't be evil" into what it has become today.
I used to run my own Jabber server with my own domain, communicating with gmail users and others, and it worked lovely until Google decided to cut off access to their users. Suddenly my own server became nearly useless with all my non-techy friends suddenly unable to communicate. Sure I could have granted them all accounts on my server, but most of them had just used the google chat program, and switching them to something more open would be difficult for them, to say nothing of *their* friends who are on gmail anyway.
So XMPP is essentially dead, thanks to google and we are not better off for it, no matter what they want us to believe about Hangouts.
As with Windows, this is really up to the application. Windows apps store this information on the registry and then request that size and position on next launch. Linux apps often do similar things, at least with size. Many apps are poorly written. But quite a few seen to remember their last size. Position is harder to get right because users may use multiple desktops so fixing the position isn't always the right thing to do.
I suspect that with BASIC not relying on pointers at all for general function, security for IoT is probably a lot better than when C is used. I don't think your pessimistic comments about BASIC are really valid. Also this BASIC implementation is interpereted, so as long as the interpreter is secure with bounds checking, BASIC programs could well be very secure and correct, much more than many people's C sketches are in Arduino!
For those interested, there's a project called MicroPython that implements a full-featured Python 3 interpreter on a microprocessor. Like the BASIC chip it's interpreted so it's slower than bare C. But it does let you use all the niceness and rapid development capabilities of Python on a 32-bit microprocessor.
In Windows it's always been up to the application developer too, if I recall correctly. Many apps save this information in the registry. I don't think Windows itself does this for the apps.
The web browser on Kindles with e-ink screens is really not that great at all. The e-ink screen is too slow for fancier content anyway.
What a silly comment. How would FAA regulation do anything in a case like this? The quadcopter was owned and operated by a commerical agency. So we already know who the operator is so they could already be fined for reckless behavior or otherwise sanctioned by the sporting organization. As you say, "pro drones" are really expensive so they aren't likely to be used by rank amateur idiots next to the white house or by an airport. How would FAA registration do anything helpful here?
I had no idea TV was like this. I haven't really watched any prime-time television in years now. Didn't know I was missing so much! Are the popular sitcoms and dramas like this also?
Yeah it definitely works, and they do produce enough amps and volts in the short term to crank an engine. However there's no way they can store the same number of amp-hours as a lead-acid battery.
Also they put a huge amount of strain on the alternator as they will draw a lot more amps charging rapidly than a lead acid battery typically does.
There are reasons why super capacitors aren't in widespread use in cars as a replacement for batteries, though they still hold some promise as an assistive technology.
Already VW and other companies are planning to go way into electric vehicles. And why wouldn't they want to? It's an easier and cheaper way of passing the EPA buck onto someone else. Instead of having to try to meet every stringent reg they can let someone else entirely (power companies) deal with that issue. And will they be able to deal with the issue either? Doubtful.
Everyone talks about how dishonest VW was. But strictly speaking, they followed the letter of the law as it was written. Obviously they violated the intent. But when it comes to tricky-to-follow laws, the letter of the law is where you'll go every time. They met the tests as the EPA required. The EPA moving to a more "real-world" testing system perhaps might be a tipping point. I honestly doubt there's an engine on the planet that really meets EPA pollution regs, and this real-world testing will soon find this out. I'm all for clean air, but the EPA and the public has been lulled into a false sense of what can be achieved. And what does "real world testing" mean anyway? Straight and level? Steady climb for 400 miles? It's a gong show.
For years the EPA and other interested parties have deluded the public into thinking we can have our cake and eat it too. We can drive cars as much as we want. And it's clean! In fact cars always will be about trade-offs. Risk and benefits. And nevermind net CO2, which isn't even part of this.
And electric doesn't actually help much because almost all diesel pollution is from heavy trucks which at present aren't really going to be made electric.