If you live in linux land and love using only command line, then GIT is fine. On the other hand, if you want to grab the latest code, make a change and commit, GIT sucks. It's especially true if you're using Github. Having to rebase is tiresome, especially on windows.
Debian seems to handle it OK. The same Debian repositories can make an awesome desktop machine, a rock solid server, a single purpose kiosk, or an HTPC. And all this software is written in a variety of languages and runs on a variety of hardware.
The freedom of association is a good thing, until those associations become criminal organizations. Banks are responsible for orders of magnitude more property crime than everyone in jail put together, and practically none of it gets punished. It would be easier to abolish them entirely.
Just because there exists a capitalist economic system in this country, does not mean you are required to participate in it.
Except that I need to eat and pay taxes. I don't get to do that unless I please the owners of the means of production.
It reduces bid/ask spreads and thus lowers the costs associated with making trades
You cannot extract money from a system and simultaneously lower costs. All the money an HFT guy makes would have ended up in someone elses pocket if he didn't get there first.
They buy low, use a propietary knowledge base to estimate fair value, factor in business costs, assume risk that items won't sell at an expected price, and try to turn a profit. I may not know where to find a velvet black-light poster of Elvis
You don't know where to find that black velvet Elvis, but everyone knows where to find stocks. That's what exchanges are for.
We already have them, they are called credit unions.
Exactly. So why should banks be legal? They provide nothing credit unions don't, and cause immense amounts of crime. e.g. the 2008 financial crisis was bigger than all property crime put together by a factor of 100.
If you think it is immoral to charge interest, then I suggest you refrain from being complicit in this immoral system by never taking out a student loan or a car loan or a mortgage.
So you're implying that I'm a hypocrit for living in the world I actually live in, instead of pretending that I live in the world we should strive to live in? Some things don't work until we all decide to do it. Some of those things work a lot better than the non-cooperative alternative. This is what government is for.
You should also lend other people money interest free so they don't need to turn to immorally usurious banks.
I'd go even further and abolish the idea of lending and private ownership of capital. Whoever needs the resources most should get them. This should be determined democratically, instead of autocratically.
The HFTs are paying the stock exchanges a fee to have access to faster trades. The service HFT provides is market making
If that was a valuable service, the stock exchanges would be paying the HFT guys, not the other way around.
Banks borrow money at a lower rate and and lend money at a higher rate creating profit with each transaction. This was seen as immoral at various times in history, but now we know this serves to create liquidity.
It's still immoral, despite creating liquidity. There's absolutely no reason we couldn't create all the liquidity we want with non-profit, publicly owned financial institutions.
more to the point has someone done a distributed tor like social network with client side encryptions and easy key exchanges for adding new friends? like, is there anything we could move on to then..
Yes, that's RetroShare. It uses the PGP web of trust model to provide end to end encrypted equivalents email, IRC, file transfer, status feeds, newsgroups, and more. The only people who can actually prove you're on the network are those you are connected directly to. If you're doing it right those will be trusted friends.
Stupid building codes, driver's permits, garbage collection, always making ME pay for them.
Why shouldn't the government pay for all of those things? Would we get better compliance if it did? Would that lead to improved quality of life for our citizens? These are testable hypotheses.
Would you really expect capacity to run out linearly? Write balancing means that you should expect every bit of flash to be written roughly the same amount on average. That means once you start losing the ability to write to some cells, you can expect more cells to fail in short order.
I mean the 4th amendment. And no, that's not a sidebar. When our leaders break the highest law of the land, that's a crime. How are we supposed to hold those criminals responsible and ensure that no similar law breaking occurs in the future?
The law as written was meant to ensure companies are responsible for the archaeological costs incurred from digging up their land instead of saddling the taxpayer.
If the tax payer is interested in archaeology, they should be willing to pay for it.
As a result, they would quietly fill any 'gaps' they found with concrete (sometimes truckloads) just to avoid finding any inconvenient remains
All in all, the effect of the law ran exactly opposite to the intent of the law
Which is stupid, because it's trivially easy to make a law that works the way it's intended. Don't force the landowner or construction company to pay for archeology that's supposed to benefit society as a whole. If they find ruins, they should stop production, receive a stipend for their time, and the government should hire the archaeologist.
Anyone is free to make a Scrabble clone as long as it doesn't look so similar to the original that people would think it is authorized by the company that owns the original.
If the board doesn't look like a Scrabble board, if it doesn't have the same number of squares, and the same bonus tiles in the same position, then it's not a Scrabble clone at all.
Society has been pretty much unbearable since more than one person has been in a group. Before that, loneliness was unbearable. And yet, most people aren't clinically depressed.
I said depression is a rational response to an unbearable society. Most people aren't depressed because most people aren't rational.
Depression can be cured, or let's call it remission if you want.
This is a big lie promoted by psychiatrists and the pharmaceutical industry for their own profit. Many of them probably believe it, but it's not supported by the evidence. Antidepressants can be effective in partially alleviating some of the symptoms, but only for extreme cases of depression. And in those extreme cases, the benefit is only marginal. The vast majority of people on antidepressants can be expected to show no clinically significant improvement.
Nothing psychiatry has to offer can be clinically shown to make depressives feel normal. They only make the extremely depressed feel marginally less shitty, if they're lucky.
Sadly, a lot of the treatment plans for depression seem to be keep throwing things at it and see if something sticks.
Or you keep throwing things at it until it gets better by itself and the psychiatrist takes credit for it.
And that kind of reasoning is exactly why there is no hope for America. If you keep voting for what you don't want, you'll keep getting it. You have to realize that the differences between the two parties are negligible. Then you will be free to vote your conscience.
How the hell do you expect Democracy to work if you cannot tell The People about the activities of the government they're supposed to be in charge of? It's not a very difficult concept to understand.
I don't believe anyone has ever claimed that the NSA, CIA, whatever other alphabet soup agencies need to disclose everything they do.
I do. Everything every government agency does should be open to the public. If there's a need for operational security, some secrecy may be appropriate, but it should be extremely limited in scope and duration.
No one argues that the need for secrecy is warranted in most situations.
I do. How do you know that the need for secrecy is warranted? Only because those who want the secrecy tell you it is. That's a pretty profound conflict of interest.
Slashdot Mirror
If you live in linux land and love using only command line, then GIT is fine. On the other hand, if you want to grab the latest code, make a change and commit, GIT sucks. It's especially true if you're using Github. Having to rebase is tiresome, especially on windows.
Sounds like a problem with Windows, not git.
I heard you really liked github...
Debian seems to handle it OK. The same Debian repositories can make an awesome desktop machine, a rock solid server, a single purpose kiosk, or an HTPC. And all this software is written in a variety of languages and runs on a variety of hardware.
So when is VirtualBox going to get the same treatment, and who is going to fork it when it happens?
The gag order is blatantly illegal under the 4th amendment, and as such carries no force of law.
the freedom of association is a good thing.
The freedom of association is a good thing, until those associations become criminal organizations. Banks are responsible for orders of magnitude more property crime than everyone in jail put together, and practically none of it gets punished. It would be easier to abolish them entirely.
Just because there exists a capitalist economic system in this country, does not mean you are required to participate in it.
Except that I need to eat and pay taxes. I don't get to do that unless I please the owners of the means of production.
It reduces bid/ask spreads and thus lowers the costs associated with making trades
You cannot extract money from a system and simultaneously lower costs. All the money an HFT guy makes would have ended up in someone elses pocket if he didn't get there first.
They buy low, use a propietary knowledge base to estimate fair value, factor in business costs, assume risk that items won't sell at an expected price, and try to turn a profit. I may not know where to find a velvet black-light poster of Elvis
You don't know where to find that black velvet Elvis, but everyone knows where to find stocks. That's what exchanges are for.
We already have them, they are called credit unions.
Exactly. So why should banks be legal? They provide nothing credit unions don't, and cause immense amounts of crime. e.g. the 2008 financial crisis was bigger than all property crime put together by a factor of 100.
If you think it is immoral to charge interest, then I suggest you refrain from being complicit in this immoral system by never taking out a student loan or a car loan or a mortgage.
So you're implying that I'm a hypocrit for living in the world I actually live in, instead of pretending that I live in the world we should strive to live in? Some things don't work until we all decide to do it. Some of those things work a lot better than the non-cooperative alternative. This is what government is for.
You should also lend other people money interest free so they don't need to turn to immorally usurious banks.
I'd go even further and abolish the idea of lending and private ownership of capital. Whoever needs the resources most should get them. This should be determined democratically, instead of autocratically.
The HFTs are paying the stock exchanges a fee to have access to faster trades. The service HFT provides is market making
If that was a valuable service, the stock exchanges would be paying the HFT guys, not the other way around.
Banks borrow money at a lower rate and and lend money at a higher rate creating profit with each transaction. This was seen as immoral at various times in history, but now we know this serves to create liquidity.
It's still immoral, despite creating liquidity. There's absolutely no reason we couldn't create all the liquidity we want with non-profit, publicly owned financial institutions.
How are they "siphoning" anything away from a majority of people?
Easy, the value they extract through arbitrage would otherwise be retained by the parties making actual trades.
How are they giving nothing in social value? The money these people make they spend on other business ventures
So do any other sort of theives, what's your point?
Problem is that nothing can replace FB. Want to listen to music on Spotify? Need a FB account.
Then fuck Spotify. Use RetroShare and listen to your friend's music.
Nothing out there even comes to what FB does, as in a big "watering hole" for people to post notes on, sync events, message, chat, or write notes
RetroShare does all of that. Status feeds, email, live chat, forums, file transfer, and more.
more to the point has someone done a distributed tor like social network with client side encryptions and easy key exchanges for adding new friends? like, is there anything we could move on to then..
Yes, that's RetroShare. It uses the PGP web of trust model to provide end to end encrypted equivalents email, IRC, file transfer, status feeds, newsgroups, and more. The only people who can actually prove you're on the network are those you are connected directly to. If you're doing it right those will be trusted friends.
Enforcing an unjust law is not just amoral, but immoral. "I was only following orders" is never an excuse.
And? What's your point? If it furthers the public good, and won't get funded any other way, isn't it a good thing that the government steps in?
Stupid building codes, driver's permits, garbage collection, always making ME pay for them.
Why shouldn't the government pay for all of those things? Would we get better compliance if it did? Would that lead to improved quality of life for our citizens? These are testable hypotheses.
Would you really expect capacity to run out linearly? Write balancing means that you should expect every bit of flash to be written roughly the same amount on average. That means once you start losing the ability to write to some cells, you can expect more cells to fail in short order.
I mean the 4th amendment. And no, that's not a sidebar. When our leaders break the highest law of the land, that's a crime. How are we supposed to hold those criminals responsible and ensure that no similar law breaking occurs in the future?
The law as written was meant to ensure companies are responsible for the archaeological costs incurred from digging up their land instead of saddling the taxpayer.
If the tax payer is interested in archaeology, they should be willing to pay for it.
As a result, they would quietly fill any 'gaps' they found with concrete (sometimes truckloads) just to avoid finding any inconvenient remains
All in all, the effect of the law ran exactly opposite to the intent of the law
Which is stupid, because it's trivially easy to make a law that works the way it's intended. Don't force the landowner or construction company to pay for archeology that's supposed to benefit society as a whole. If they find ruins, they should stop production, receive a stipend for their time, and the government should hire the archaeologist.
Sony throwing root kits onto CDs
Throwing rootkits onto CDs is a federal crime that would have gotten any of us a decade in jail.
Anyone is free to make a Scrabble clone as long as it doesn't look so similar to the original that people would think it is authorized by the company that owns the original.
If the board doesn't look like a Scrabble board, if it doesn't have the same number of squares, and the same bonus tiles in the same position, then it's not a Scrabble clone at all.
Society has been pretty much unbearable since more than one person has been in a group. Before that, loneliness was unbearable. And yet, most people aren't clinically depressed.
I said depression is a rational response to an unbearable society. Most people aren't depressed because most people aren't rational.
Depression can be cured, or let's call it remission if you want.
This is a big lie promoted by psychiatrists and the pharmaceutical industry for their own profit. Many of them probably believe it, but it's not supported by the evidence. Antidepressants can be effective in partially alleviating some of the symptoms, but only for extreme cases of depression. And in those extreme cases, the benefit is only marginal. The vast majority of people on antidepressants can be expected to show no clinically significant improvement.
Nothing psychiatry has to offer can be clinically shown to make depressives feel normal. They only make the extremely depressed feel marginally less shitty, if they're lucky.
Sadly, a lot of the treatment plans for depression seem to be keep throwing things at it and see if something sticks.
Or you keep throwing things at it until it gets better by itself and the psychiatrist takes credit for it.
And that kind of reasoning is exactly why there is no hope for America. If you keep voting for what you don't want, you'll keep getting it. You have to realize that the differences between the two parties are negligible. Then you will be free to vote your conscience.
How the hell do you expect Democracy to work if you cannot tell The People about the activities of the government they're supposed to be in charge of? It's not a very difficult concept to understand.
I don't believe anyone has ever claimed that the NSA, CIA, whatever other alphabet soup agencies need to disclose everything they do.
I do. Everything every government agency does should be open to the public. If there's a need for operational security, some secrecy may be appropriate, but it should be extremely limited in scope and duration.
No one argues that the need for secrecy is warranted in most situations.
I do. How do you know that the need for secrecy is warranted? Only because those who want the secrecy tell you it is. That's a pretty profound conflict of interest.