I'm seriously considering blocking CmdrTaco from the list of people whose stories I see. If you look back over the list of duplicates, nearly all of them are Taco's.
Actually, I think timothy is the worst about it. The problem is that timothy only seems to duplicate his own stories (how he manages to do that so often, I have no idea), so if you block timothy, you won't see those stories at all.
Redhat: Can't push X past 800x600, resulting in icons the size of quarters. Keep in mind I have a geforce3.
Odd. I have a GF2 at work and a GF4 at home, and I run 1600x1200 in both places. Which version of RedHat are you using? Did you download nVidia's drivers?
Re:We are emotional and not rational??!!!
on
Halloween VII
·
· Score: 2
Excuse me? Because people in Microsoft's survey were supportive of OSS, that means that they were predisposed to like it, and therefore is based on emotion and not rationality?! This doesn't make any sense. What is this trying to say, that people who like OSS are simply using it to make a statement, and not becaue they legitimately prefer it? That is a pretty arrogant assessment of the FACTS if you ask me. I use OSS because I find it to be a better product, for several different practical reasons. And since when is it a rule that you can't be rational AND emotional about something?
What this says about Microsoft is that they believe their own propaganda. If you spend day after day, week after week, and year after year repeating something, you will eventually come to believe it, whether or not you believed it at first. The people at Microsoft have spent so much time arguing that their products are better than anything else available, that they now believe that it's impossible for that not to be true. In their mind, anyone who thinks otherwise must be speaking from emotion, because they can't conceive how anyone could rationally disagree with them.
Slashdot already covered this story last week here.
Not only that, the original story was also posted by timothy. Is his memory so poor that he's incapable of remembering what he posted less than a week ago?
I agree with you all the way that RMS gets less respect than he deserves. He should be speaking out against the BitKeeper license. He should be using it as an example of what kind of restrictions proprietary licenses can put on you However, he should not be doing it on the LKML.
Starting a political argument on the LKML accomplishes nothing. Almost everyone who reads the LKML knows about the BitKeeper issue and has an opinion already. Posting a rant on the LKML is more likely to polarize people against his position than anything else.
Uhm, that "our" throws off the line's rhythm; as it stands now that line has one syllable more than the original: You gotta fight... for your right... to paaaaaaaar-tyyyyy! Now, if you changed it to "for digital rights" then you'd stay with the beat without losing your meaning.
Well, no, because "for digital rights" is still five syllables, whereas "for your right" is only three. Also, I was trying to stay as close to the quote in the article as possible. It's a tradeoff either way, but I didn't think there was enough to be gained by tossing out the "our". Appreciate the feedback, though.
The linked article quote Duane Gish, one of the premier proponents of Creationism. Before anyone puts too much stock in what he has to say, it should be noted that Gish has a record of misrepresenting facts.
That either FTL (faster then Light) travel is utterly impossibly, or that civilations that discover FTL are few and far between.
I've seen a few posts here assuming that FTL travel is necessary for any kind of interstellar exporation or colonization. It isn't.
Even by conservative projections of technology development, it will soon be possible for starships to reach a significant fraction of the speed of light (say, 10%) by using lightsails pushed by lasers in solar orbit. (The ships would decelerate at their destination by releasing a second sail that would reflect the light from the home laser back to the ship.)
At 0.1c, a ship could cross the galaxy in about a million years -- an eyeblink compared to the lifespan of the universe, which is measured in tens of billions of years. Granted, one ship couldn't make that journey, so you'd need some kind of self-replicating robot probe that built new lasers at each star it stopped at, but the point is that the galaxy can be explored in a reasonable amount of time at speeds well less than the speed of light.
It's through the pledge the children start to learn that there are higher principles than simple "me first moral relativism".
No, all the pledge teaches children is that the United States is a Republic for Witches' Stands.
No one learns anything by reciting a canned pledge. The time spent reciting the pledge every day would be better used to teach genuine civics lessons about what this country is supposed to stand for.
They are talking about what amounts to ERROR CODES here. Not SOURCE CODE. Mechanics want to know what certain error messages mean, they don't want the fucking source code. How many mechanics are going to fix bugs in a RTOS car? And if they had access would you even want to drive your car knowing that "Big Joe" from down at Jiffy Lube reworked some of the brake logic?
Everyone saying this is some sort of victory for Open Source is an illiterate moron, or didn't read the article.
It's not a victory for Open Source per se, but it's a similar issue. It's the idea of openness versus closedness. Does the consumer benefit more if the protocols for talking to car computers are kept closed so that only the manufacturer can perform repairs? Or is the consumer better off if his car's computer has open protocols that allow any competent mechanic to diagnose and repair the car?
There's a very direct parallel to the open-source-vs-proprietary-software debate. If this issue gets a lot of publicity, it'll make more people think about then open-versus-closed issue. That will make it easier to explain the benefits of open source to non-technical people.
Wasn't it Bob Young who asked "Would you buy a car with the hood welded shut?"
One hurdle is getting people to trust Microsoft... Early opinion makers are giving them the benefit of the doubt.
Why? Why on Earth, after all that's happened, would anyone give Microsoft the benefit of the doubt? Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Fool me a dozen times, I must be a fucking idiot.
Microsoft lead attorney John Warden told Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly that the states' proposed remedy was punitive...
Yeah, imagine that. Being convicted of a crime and then actually being punished. What a crazy world we live in, huh?
Cheap humor aside, can anyone explain (and IANAL, so I'm asking honestly here) why a company that lost an antitrust suit gets to make arguments about what the punishment should be? If a private citizen is successfully sued, does s/he get to go through another round of hearings arguing that s/he shouldn't be penalized?
If a software application representing 5000 hours uses GPL code that reflects only 100 hours, is the GPL fair in its argument that the entire product is GPL?
If a software application representing 5000 hours of work uses proprietary Microsoft code that only required 100 hours to develop, would Microsoft be correct in claiming that its copyright had been violated?
TheFrood
Do-it-yourself UPS? It's been done.
on
Do-it-yourself UPS
·
· Score: 5, Funny
I've been doing this for years. I have a big brown truck, and whenever I want to send something to someone else, I just put it in a box, hop in the truck, and drive it over to them. I've even got a little portable touchpad for them to sign on, so it feels like the real thing.
Great! And what if they AGREE with you? What has THAT student learned?
Education isn't a one-on-one process, at least not in any school system I know of. In a classroom of 25 students, odds are very good that someone will disagree with the teacher's opinion. Start a debate, let everyone jump in with their own opinions.
A good teacher can -- and should -- debate a student from the complete opposite of whatever position the student takes. The student should be engaged to defend WHY they think what they think.
If it's a private one-on-one tutoring situation, I'd agree. But a debate among students with different opinions in a classroom serves the same purpose, and probably does it better.
Indoctrination is when the teacher cares about what opinion the student ends up with.
And where exactly did the original poster say he cared what opinion his students left his class with?
Slashdot Mirror
I'm seriously considering blocking CmdrTaco from the list of people whose stories I see. If you look back over the list of duplicates, nearly all of them are Taco's.
Actually, I think timothy is the worst about it. The problem is that timothy only seems to duplicate his own stories (how he manages to do that so often, I have no idea), so if you block timothy, you won't see those stories at all.
TheFrood
The Underdogs is an indispensible resource for those who enjoy retro PC gaming. Highly recommended.
No, this post is (+5, Funny)
TheFrood
Redhat: Can't push X past 800x600, resulting in icons the size of quarters. Keep in mind I have a geforce3.
Odd. I have a GF2 at work and a GF4 at home, and I run 1600x1200 in both places. Which version of RedHat are you using? Did you download nVidia's drivers?
Excuse me? Because people in Microsoft's survey were supportive of OSS, that means that they were predisposed to like it, and therefore is based on emotion and not rationality?! This doesn't make any sense. What is this trying to say, that people who like OSS are simply using it to make a statement, and not becaue they legitimately prefer it? That is a pretty arrogant assessment of the FACTS if you ask me. I use OSS because I find it to be a better product, for several different practical reasons. And since when is it a rule that you can't be rational AND emotional about something?
What this says about Microsoft is that they believe their own propaganda. If you spend day after day, week after week, and year after year repeating something, you will eventually come to believe it, whether or not you believed it at first. The people at Microsoft have spent so much time arguing that their products are better than anything else available, that they now believe that it's impossible for that not to be true. In their mind, anyone who thinks otherwise must be speaking from emotion, because they can't conceive how anyone could rationally disagree with them.
TheFrood
The original story appeared almost two weeks ago, so this actually isn't too bad by timothy's standards.
5. Are those upside-down question marks the cutest little things you've ever seen, or what?
TheFrood
Slashdot already covered this story last week here.
Not only that, the original story was also posted by timothy. Is his memory so poor that he's incapable of remembering what he posted less than a week ago?
I agree with you all the way that RMS gets less respect than he deserves. He should be speaking out against the BitKeeper license. He should be using it as an example of what kind of restrictions proprietary licenses can put on you However, he should not be doing it on the LKML.
Starting a political argument on the LKML accomplishes nothing. Almost everyone who reads the LKML knows about the BitKeeper issue and has an opinion already. Posting a rant on the LKML is more likely to polarize people against his position than anything else.
Keep at it, RMS, but be smarter about it.
Uhm, that "our" throws off the line's rhythm; as it stands now that line has one syllable more than the original: You gotta fight... for your right... to paaaaaaaar-tyyyyy! Now, if you changed it to "for digital rights" then you'd stay with the beat without losing your meaning.
Well, no, because "for digital rights" is still five syllables, whereas "for your right" is only three. Also, I was trying to stay as close to the quote in the article as possible. It's a tradeoff either way, but I didn't think there was enough to be gained by tossing out the "our". Appreciate the feedback, though.
TheFrood
There's also another article on the fight for our digital rights in Congress.
You gotta fight... for our digital rights... in Connnnnn-gress!
TheFrood
The linked article quote Duane Gish, one of the premier proponents of Creationism. Before anyone puts too much stock in what he has to say, it should be noted that Gish has a record of misrepresenting facts.
TheFrood
How about paring down the description of the device to a few sentences, like you usually do? You really don't need all the details on the front page.
TheFrood
It's nice, however I'd far rather than when a new window is opened, it is put in a new tab rather than firing up a new window.
Edit->Preferences->Navigator->Tabbed Browsing->
Open tabs instead of windows for->
Middle-click or control-click of links in a Web page.
Seanbaby has some rather amusing remarks about the Power Glove (and other useless Nintendo peripherals.)
TheFrood
That either FTL (faster then Light) travel is utterly impossibly, or that civilations that discover FTL are few and far between.
I've seen a few posts here assuming that FTL travel is necessary for any kind of interstellar exporation or colonization. It isn't.
Even by conservative projections of technology development, it will soon be possible for starships to reach a significant fraction of the speed of light (say, 10%) by using lightsails pushed by lasers in solar orbit. (The ships would decelerate at their destination by releasing a second sail that would reflect the light from the home laser back to the ship.)
At 0.1c, a ship could cross the galaxy in about a million years -- an eyeblink compared to the lifespan of the universe, which is measured in tens of billions of years. Granted, one ship couldn't make that journey, so you'd need some kind of self-replicating robot probe that built new lasers at each star it stopped at, but the point is that the galaxy can be explored in a reasonable amount of time at speeds well less than the speed of light.
TheFrood
Salon in Dire Straits
from the partying-like-it's-salon1999 dept.
You actually went with this over "from the can't-get-your-money-for-nothing dept."?
TheFrood
It's through the pledge the children start to learn that there are higher principles than simple "me first moral relativism".
No, all the pledge teaches children is that the United States is a Republic for Witches' Stands.
No one learns anything by reciting a canned pledge. The time spent reciting the pledge every day would be better used to teach genuine civics lessons about what this country is supposed to stand for.
TheFrood
They are talking about what amounts to ERROR CODES here. Not SOURCE CODE. Mechanics want to know what certain error messages mean, they don't want the fucking source code. How many mechanics are going to fix bugs in a RTOS car? And if they had access would you even want to drive your car knowing that "Big Joe" from down at Jiffy Lube reworked some of the brake logic?
Everyone saying this is some sort of victory for Open Source is an illiterate moron, or didn't read the article.
It's not a victory for Open Source per se, but it's a similar issue. It's the idea of openness versus closedness. Does the consumer benefit more if the protocols for talking to car computers are kept closed so that only the manufacturer can perform repairs? Or is the consumer better off if his car's computer has open protocols that allow any competent mechanic to diagnose and repair the car?
There's a very direct parallel to the open-source-vs-proprietary-software debate. If this issue gets a lot of publicity, it'll make more people think about then open-versus-closed issue. That will make it easier to explain the benefits of open source to non-technical people.
Wasn't it Bob Young who asked "Would you buy a car with the hood welded shut?"
TheFrood
From the article:
... Early opinion makers are giving them the benefit of the doubt.
One hurdle is getting people to trust Microsoft
Why? Why on Earth, after all that's happened, would anyone give Microsoft the benefit of the doubt? Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Fool me a dozen times, I must be a fucking idiot.
TheFrood
Microsoft lead attorney John Warden told Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly that the states' proposed remedy was punitive...
Yeah, imagine that. Being convicted of a crime and then actually being punished. What a crazy world we live in, huh?
Cheap humor aside, can anyone explain (and IANAL, so I'm asking honestly here) why a company that lost an antitrust suit gets to make arguments about what the punishment should be? If a private citizen is successfully sued, does s/he get to go through another round of hearings arguing that s/he shouldn't be penalized?
Frood
If a software application representing 5000 hours uses GPL code that reflects only 100 hours, is the GPL fair in its argument that the entire product is GPL?
If a software application representing 5000 hours of work uses proprietary Microsoft code that only required 100 hours to develop, would Microsoft be correct in claiming that its copyright had been violated?
TheFrood
I've been doing this for years. I have a big brown truck, and whenever I want to send something to someone else, I just put it in a box, hop in the truck, and drive it over to them. I've even got a little portable touchpad for them to sign on, so it feels like the real thing.
TheFrood
... they look something like this (identifying info is X'd out, I like my job
original complaint:
RE: Unauthorized Distribution of Copyrighted Work: X
Dear X University:
Well, you've already given us a clue. Your university has the same name as a song.
TheFrood
Great! And what if they AGREE with you? What has THAT student learned?
Education isn't a one-on-one process, at least not in any school system I know of. In a classroom of 25 students, odds are very good that someone will disagree with the teacher's opinion. Start a debate, let everyone jump in with their own opinions.
A good teacher can -- and should -- debate a student from the complete opposite of whatever position the student takes. The student should be engaged to defend WHY they think what they think.
If it's a private one-on-one tutoring situation, I'd agree. But a debate among students with different opinions in a classroom serves the same purpose, and probably does it better.
Indoctrination is when the teacher cares about what opinion the student ends up with.
And where exactly did the original poster say he cared what opinion his students left his class with?
TheFrood