I have attempted to install redhat numerous times and find their installation non-intuitive and tedious. How can one SLOW DOWN the actual execution of a linux install? Or perhaps the actual execution speed of the resultant install? Redhat does! They execute at less than half the of the speed of my slackware install. I wish I understood why. \
Slackware is indeed the ONLY truly cross-platform linux distribution that I'm aware of. The scripts go where they belong. They utter sensible things. Tarballs compile painlessly. Heaven!
law today is like programming in assembler
on
OSI APSL Response
·
· Score: 1
I'm not a lawyer nor do I pretend to be one, But I get the notion that today's law is so microspecific that writing a nice license that doesn't give the company away is a hard chore. I wouldn't assume a bad intent on the part of apple that is connecting to us. They know they came from here. We always have loyalists on the inside, BTW, anyway.
You're SOOO right. It's a CYA maneouvre (sp?) IBM has been so amazingly behind open source recently that it blows me away. They most definitely possess those who can hack(TM). They have also been excellent net-heads, embracing apache, and linux as well. They function in an insane world where any fool with a lawyer can create a load of grief for them. A nice boilerplate defensive license makes perfect sense.
I've browsed the above comments, and come to a rather severe conclusion: RMS is right! When mere humans feel ownership over a basic mathematical principle, it's like sheep vs cow wars all over again. We have a terrain, built by God. Whose paradigm shall predominate? Forgodssake, look up the fights over MOVEABLE TYPE! I'm just plain fried over shit like this. My patience is at an end. We are a we, aren't we?
Actually, 'potatoe' is a perfecktly good olde englisch spelling. I'm kinda english (by birth) and an anglophyle of sorts, so I should know. It may be welsh. I definitely know it flew when chaucer was around. That trailing 'E' absolutely *abounds* in oldE illumated documents.
Answer? Ubiquity. M$ got where it is through the ubiquity (every-where-ness) of dos. It was a tacit conspiracy between M$ and the user community. M$ said "hey, you big corporate users, you better be licensed!" and at the same time left basic DOS unprotected when everyone else (competition) had pro-lok and dongles and god knows what else. They KNEW dos would spread like a virus. They KNEW win 3.1 would, too. Win 95, they were taking some measures (remember the registration wizard uproar?) But backed off. Serendipity time. Made them even richer by allowing the pirating of W95. They were gonna be a de fucking facto fucking standard, dammit! Piracy was their secret partner, regardless of the protestations of fearless leader. To be serious for a sec, M$ attempted to do the impossible; to specify a generation of IT needs and processes apriori. These things must grow organically. It's sorta like spec'ing out a life form's DNA without the benefit of evolution (the ultimate OSS project. Worked rather well for me. Don't like my nose, though. Wish I had a pull-down for that.)) Open Source is the ONLY way this high minded project stuff can work effectively. Try to plan it from on high, and the leader and his followers all tend to get psychotic. Only a cult can get a big enough gathering of people together to make the illusion seem real. Gates got a small cadre' to believe. They had a narcissistic, bill- centered vision to build, and to hell with truth. To finalise...
They almost made it! :cue bwahaha; "BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAH! Guess who's singing dat tune now, eh?
I tried numerous times to vote on whether M$ would squish li'l ol' linux, but I kept getting "document contains no data." ZD runs NT, don't they? Hmmmm....
Microsoft has violated it. Most of their network code is BSD and GNU based. Check out any good hacker site. Various important signatures associated w/M$ shit support me here.
For the sake of our communal god(s), couldn't you guys learn TO SPELL; and to FORM A SENTENCE? Katz can write; He does so - well. ALWAYS! YOU BOZOS CAN'T! He flows - you don't. I'm tired; that's enough.
writer, founder of the philosophy objectivism
on
Free the Open Source
·
· Score: 1
Rand ran off the rails when she compromised her own principles and "cultivated" nathaniel branden, then turned on him when he failed to realize her "brilliance" and chose another woman instead. She grew resentful, and jealous, and lost it. She got hard and nasty after that. Leonard Piko, or whatever the hell his name is, her subsequent and opportunistic sycophant, who thinks himself heir to the Rand "legacy", is proof of that. He's a moron. If you want to understand Objectivism in Practice, read any of Branden's books. He soaked up her uncontaminated musings, while she was intellectually free of greed and control; He put them to work in a therapeutic setting. He still admires her, and I do too. OK, she was a feeble excuse for a philosopher, but the gonads it took for a woman to *declare* herself a philosopher in what is *still* (I can't believe I'm saying this) a male-only field was stunning. Give the bitch some credit, eh? Branden's principles work, and are very in sync with open software. read any of his stuff, and you'll see why. Explaining here would be a losing proposition. Start with the Alienated Self. It'll freak you out. He has a web site: http://www.nathanielbranden.net . The site sucks, aesthetically, and looks corporate, and yada yada. It does run on apache, though. Hey, we can't all be geeks. His point is to pay attention and THINK about all you do. Simple. Kinda Geeky, don't ya think?
I've seen that video too. The effect was stunning. Done around 1986 or so, directed by that Russian or Polish guy who was very popular at the time. His videos were *always* interesting, no two the same. I seem to remember a chunky blond gut screeching very loudly into the camera(s)... Definitely prior art.
you rock. i think that may be enough. You've got the point. that'll work. Reality Warriors are hard to find. Anyone with the hunger must suffice. No surrender. Hang on. We'll help.
"vendor support is opportunistic" *means* that a FREE os with robust attributes seems like a way to undercut the competition. OSS could, in a way be the indian programming contingient come home to roost, if you know what I mean. THEY don't pay anybody, but THEY acquire a huge market thru the commoditisation of a solid os. We win, in the long haul, but THEY may try to derail the train sometime down the road, to their own benefit, in the short haul. WE, however, must stay focussed on RMS's so-far validated truth that free information WORKS. GET IT?
3d world exploitation inevitably pisses of everyone involved, both at home and abroad. I know market pressures force this sort of stuff to happen, but shipping computer production to botswana or india *isn't* competition, for god's sake. It's a short-term stop-gap COP-OUT! I'm a rabid (albeit long-haired; think of me as a PJ O'Rourke republican) conservative and believer in markets but even *I* can recognise when greed gets out of hand. *sigh* What ever happened to good old fashioned ETHICAL capitalism? (Hey! It could happen! And occasionally has!) There should be laws that say "NO! If you live *here* you CAN'T screw your neighbor for your own enrichment!" I can't make adequate sense of what I'm trying to say here. I don't write that fast. The basic idea is, someone HERE is thinking "Hmmm... I can pay a 3d worlder *shit* to work for me and do an end run around domestic labor law; hell Clinton's in our pocket, look at all these mergers! Even Reagan wasn't that easy on business!" Hope I'm making sense. I'm seeing red right now...
Maybe I'm behind the curve here, but I downloaded slash 0.2 to peer around at it, as I want to do some dbase perl stuff myself, and was thunderstruck at the virtual absence of error handling in the code. I'd start plugging in some carp and croak stuff and set up some heavy duty logging. Perhaps the code has progressed some since the 0.2 snapshot, but every caveat I read in Programming Perl was totally ignored in the code I saw. Mind, I'm a total newbie to perl, and even *I* noticed this.
I never got through GEB, but I think I'll pick it up again as a result of this discussion. I think, however that "using the axioms of the system as part of the system" would constitute an attractor in a chaos theory sense. No rigorous definition of identity would be necessary. The neural "algorithms" of the processor would "orbit" the contradiction, or "logical singularity" as I like to think of it, attempting to solve a "problem" that doesn't exist. The "problem" might be the program's own purpose. ----"Who am I?" *There's your contradiction.* Godel implies a moreness or fuzzy outer boundary to all seemingly logical systems that would force an ever finer grain to the processing that a neural net would be brilliantly suited to. Intelligence MUST result eventually. If this makes any sense to anyone, please rock on...
The LAST thing the linux|unix|compsci community wants is there to be any major player, whatsoever. Knowledge depends on background static, and for the *nixers (or anyone else, for that matter) to stop squabbling would be the end of us. Contest is the essence of evolution, pals. Keep the contest going. God built it that way. NO PEACE!!! {anything more I say on this subject woulld be trolling. It's a joke. Sort of.}
Reading the above piece, it suddenly dawned on me why the french are rude. --- They're not. They're just indignant at cheeky furriners trying to tell them how to run their lives. My guess is that they appreciate the way day-to-day life FEELS, inconveniences and all, and like it. I know I'm looking for an OLD house right now, because half the fun of owning an old home is the smells, and the other half is the upkeep. You're in touch with reality ALL the time, and bullshit takes a back seat. Same reason I like wood heat, and stalking the wild tree, and cutting it down, and... Hmmm... sounds a lot like us *nix enthusiasts. The french've produced a lot of cool mathematicians, yaknow. Very abstract guys. Ok, now you can LART me. Just make it hurt for real.
Slashdot Mirror
I have attempted to install redhat numerous times and find their installation non-intuitive and tedious. How can one SLOW DOWN the actual
execution of a linux install? Or perhaps the actual execution speed of the resultant install? Redhat does! They execute at less than half the of the speed of my slackware install. I wish I understood why.
\
Slackware is indeed the ONLY truly cross-platform linux distribution that I'm aware of. The scripts go where they belong. They utter sensible things. Tarballs compile painlessly.
Heaven!
I'm not a lawyer nor do I pretend to be one, But I get the notion that today's law is so microspecific that writing a nice license that doesn't give the company away is a hard chore.
I wouldn't assume a bad intent on the part of apple that is connecting to us. They know they came from here. We always have loyalists on the inside, BTW, anyway.
You got it. Absolutely correct, sir.
Good boy. Thanks.
(not affiliated, by the way)
Moron
You're SOOO right. It's a CYA maneouvre (sp?)
IBM has been so amazingly behind open source recently that it blows me away. They most definitely possess those who can hack(TM).
They have also been excellent net-heads, embracing apache, and linux as well.
They function in an insane world where any fool with a lawyer can create a load of grief for them. A nice boilerplate defensive license makes perfect sense.
I've browsed the above comments, and come to a rather severe conclusion:
RMS is right!
When mere humans feel ownership over a basic mathematical principle, it's like sheep vs cow wars all over again. We have a terrain, built by God. Whose paradigm shall predominate?
Forgodssake, look up the fights over MOVEABLE TYPE!
I'm just plain fried over shit like this. My patience is at an end.
We are a we, aren't we?
Actually, 'potatoe' is a perfecktly good olde englisch spelling. I'm kinda english (by birth) and an anglophyle of sorts, so I should know.
It may be welsh. I definitely know it flew when chaucer was around. That trailing 'E' absolutely *abounds* in oldE illumated documents.
Answer?
Ubiquity.
M$ got where it is through the ubiquity (every-where-ness) of dos. It was a tacit conspiracy between M$ and the user community. M$ said "hey, you big corporate users, you better be licensed!" and at the same time left basic DOS unprotected when everyone else (competition) had pro-lok and dongles and god knows what else. They KNEW dos would spread like a virus. They KNEW win 3.1 would, too. Win 95, they were taking some measures (remember the registration wizard uproar?) But backed off. Serendipity time. Made them even richer by allowing the pirating of W95.
They were gonna be a de fucking facto fucking standard, dammit! Piracy was their secret partner, regardless of the protestations of fearless leader.
To be serious for a sec, M$ attempted to do the impossible; to specify a generation of IT needs and processes apriori. These things must grow organically.
It's sorta like spec'ing out a life form's DNA without the benefit of evolution (the ultimate OSS project. Worked rather well for me. Don't like my nose, though. Wish I had a pull-down for that.))
Open Source is the ONLY way this high minded project stuff can work effectively. Try to plan it from on high, and the leader and his followers all tend to get psychotic. Only a cult can get a big enough gathering of people together to make the illusion seem real. Gates got a small cadre' to believe. They had a narcissistic, bill- centered vision to build, and to hell with truth.
To finalise...
They almost made it!
:cue bwahaha;
"BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!
Guess who's singing dat tune now, eh?
Pinheads!!!!!
(str)
I tried numerous times to vote on whether M$ would squish li'l ol' linux, but I kept getting "document contains no data." ZD runs NT, don't they?
Hmmmm....
It's "hypocrisy", buttfuck.
If you guys can't bleeding SPELL, how can we count on you to CODE?
Geez!
Microsoft has violated it. Most of their network code is BSD and GNU based. Check out any good hacker site.
Various important signatures associated w/M$ shit support me here.
For the sake of our communal god(s), couldn't you guys learn TO SPELL; and to FORM A SENTENCE?
Katz can write; He does so - well. ALWAYS! YOU BOZOS CAN'T! He flows - you don't.
I'm tired; that's enough.
Rand ran off the rails when she compromised her own principles and "cultivated" nathaniel branden, then turned on him when he failed to realize her "brilliance" and chose another woman instead. She grew resentful, and jealous, and lost it. She got hard and nasty after that. Leonard Piko, or whatever the hell his name is, her subsequent and opportunistic sycophant, who thinks himself heir to the Rand "legacy", is proof of that. He's a moron.
If you want to understand Objectivism in Practice, read any of Branden's books. He soaked up her uncontaminated musings, while she was intellectually free of greed and control; He put them to work in a therapeutic setting.
He still admires her, and I do too. OK, she was a feeble excuse for a philosopher, but the gonads it took for a woman to *declare* herself a philosopher in what is *still* (I can't believe I'm saying this) a male-only field was stunning. Give the bitch some credit, eh?
Branden's principles work, and are very in sync with open software. read any of his stuff, and you'll see why. Explaining here would be a losing proposition.
Start with the Alienated Self. It'll freak you out.
He has a web site: http://www.nathanielbranden.net . The site sucks, aesthetically, and looks corporate, and yada yada. It does run on apache, though. Hey, we can't all be geeks.
His point is to pay attention and THINK about all you do. Simple. Kinda Geeky, don't ya think?
Small, fast, mammals, indeed!
Yarr, Harr, Harr!
Love it!
I've seen that video too. The effect was stunning. Done around 1986 or so, directed by that Russian or Polish guy who was very popular at the time. His videos were *always* interesting, no two the same. I seem to remember a chunky blond gut screeching very loudly into the camera(s)...
Definitely prior art.
you rock. i think that may be enough. You've got the point. that'll work.
Reality Warriors are hard to find. Anyone with the hunger must suffice. No surrender.
Hang on. We'll help.
"vendor support is opportunistic" *means* that a FREE os with robust attributes seems like a way to undercut the competition. OSS could, in a way be the indian programming contingient come home to roost, if you know what I mean. THEY don't pay anybody, but THEY acquire a huge market thru the commoditisation of a solid os. We win, in the long haul, but THEY may try to derail the train sometime down the road, to their own benefit, in the short haul. WE, however, must stay focussed on RMS's so-far validated truth that free information WORKS.
GET IT?
3d world exploitation inevitably pisses of everyone involved, both at home and abroad. I know market pressures force this sort of stuff to happen, but shipping computer production to botswana or india *isn't* competition, for god's sake. It's a short-term stop-gap COP-OUT! I'm a rabid (albeit long-haired; think of me as a PJ O'Rourke republican) conservative and believer in markets but even *I* can recognise when greed gets out of hand.
*sigh*
What ever happened to good old fashioned ETHICAL capitalism? (Hey! It could happen! And occasionally has!)
There should be laws that say "NO! If you live *here* you CAN'T screw your neighbor for your own enrichment!"
I can't make adequate sense of what I'm trying to say here. I don't write that fast.
The basic idea is, someone HERE is thinking "Hmmm... I can pay a 3d worlder *shit* to work for me and do an end run around domestic labor law; hell Clinton's in our pocket, look at all these mergers! Even Reagan wasn't that easy on business!"
Hope I'm making sense. I'm seeing red right now...
Maybe I'm behind the curve here, but I downloaded slash 0.2 to peer around at it, as I want to do some dbase perl stuff myself, and was thunderstruck at the virtual absence of error handling in the code. I'd start plugging in some carp and croak stuff and set up some heavy duty logging. Perhaps the code has progressed some since the 0.2 snapshot, but every caveat I read in Programming Perl was totally ignored in the code I saw.
Mind, I'm a total newbie to perl, and even *I* noticed this.
I never got through GEB, but I think I'll pick it up again as a result of this discussion. I think, however that "using the axioms of the system as part of the system" would constitute an attractor in a chaos theory sense. No rigorous definition of identity would be necessary. The neural "algorithms" of the processor would "orbit" the contradiction, or "logical singularity" as I like to think of it, attempting to solve a "problem" that doesn't exist.
The "problem" might be the program's own purpose. ----"Who am I?"
*There's your contradiction.*
Godel implies a moreness or fuzzy outer boundary to all seemingly logical systems that would force an ever finer grain to the processing that a neural net would be brilliantly suited to. Intelligence MUST result eventually.
If this makes any sense to anyone, please rock on...
The LAST thing the linux|unix|compsci community wants is there to be any major player, whatsoever. Knowledge depends on background static, and for the *nixers (or anyone else, for that matter) to stop squabbling would be the end of us. Contest is the essence of evolution, pals. Keep the contest going.
God built it that way.
NO PEACE!!!
{anything more I say on this subject woulld be trolling. It's a joke. Sort of.}
Reading the above piece, it suddenly dawned on me why the french are rude. --- They're not.
They're just indignant at cheeky furriners trying to tell them how to run their lives. My guess is that they appreciate the way day-to-day life FEELS, inconveniences and all, and like it. I know I'm looking for an OLD house right now, because half the fun of owning an old home is the smells, and the other half is the upkeep. You're in touch with reality ALL the time, and bullshit takes a back seat. Same reason I like wood heat, and stalking the wild tree, and cutting it down, and...
Hmmm... sounds a lot like us *nix enthusiasts.
The french've produced a lot of cool mathematicians, yaknow. Very abstract guys.
Ok, now you can LART me.
Just make it hurt for real.