What I find annoying about Firefox is that it has massive memory leaks and needs to be force-killed every few hours of use because it balloons to such a size that it starts killing the system it's running on. And that's pretty much a show stopper right there. There's no reason for a web browser to eat up 2GB of memory during regular use.
I have 11 tabs open right now and Firefox is only taking 368MB RAM. I'm fairly certain you're either exaggerating, trolling or you've got a misbehaving addon.
No it doesn't. Stumbled upon the concept implies the concept was NOT there before, and while researching a related matter, somone had the idea of radar, independantly. So, the quote does indeed suggest that the navy invented radar.
Incorrect. Stumbling upon something literally refers to the act of coming upon something; it does not imply existence of that something either way, not that that something existed before, nor that that something didn't exist before. You can stumble upon radar technology itself just as much as you can stumble upon the fact that someone else stumbled upon it.
This is Slashdot: there's no way of telling a troll from the average, gleefully ignorant, self-centered Slashdotter. When in doubt just ignore the whole thing, you likely have better things to do.
Wise choice. It's utter drivel, a bed knockoff of 9 1/2 weeks (which itself wasn't so great), poorly written, with a terrible premise. You know when you start thinking of the protagonist as "you stupid b*tch" and her love interest ass "what a fuckwit" you've failed to connect to the characters. Repetitive, trite "oh my!" moans from the protagonist's "inner goddess" (what tripe) add to the annoyance level. I won't even get into the cognitive dissonance required to believe you have any self worth (much less an "inner goddess") when you constantly orgasm from having a man treat you like shit.
That sounds more-or-less how I imagined the book to be, but the reason for why I never even tried to read the book is because I'm just not interested in pseudo-erotic books anyways, ie. it was not really even a choice since I'm not interested in books in that category.
I actually don't feel too sorry for today's women, so busy starving themselves into oblivion chasing rediculous media-driven notions of self-image, so desparate for male approval they betray their own political, social, and personal intrests, and throw each other under the bus, just so they won't be called a b*tch, or worse, a feminist.
Speaking of feminists I actually was just yesterday called a "gender traitor" by one because I dared to question the feminist movement and criticize things. Personally I try to aim for equality regardless of gender, not because of it, and thus my point of view apparently differs from theirs in several ways. It's the hypocrisy of things that drives me away from such movements, like if I were to mention the fact that men generally are paid slightly more than women in the exact same job I'd get huge amounts of applause and appraisal from feminists, but if I were to mention that men also generally receive much harsher punishments -- both in court and in work-life -- these same feminists either stick to strawmen, shift the discussion to something completely irrelevant or just plain, old attack me. As much as they don't like it I don't need to belong to the "girls' club" just because I have breasts and therefore I don't also need to drive their interests only when it comes to positive things; my morals and ideals dictate that everything should be equal, including the bad things, and I'm not going to compromise on that.
Oh well, this is getting really off-topic and I'm fairly certain no one here actually gives a sh*t about this stuff, so I'll just shut up now. Been an interesting thread, nevertheless.
Is it still homophobic if actual homosexuals hate the term
Yes. Homosexuals obviously aren't homophobic as long they've admitted to themselves that they are homosexuals and therefore their hatred of the term is irrelevant in this context.
Oops, did I just tear a hole on your angry gay rights post's logic?
and I can tell you that being clear-cut from where you sit cuts no ice whatsoever with a German court.
Of course it doesn't. I am just hoping someone would explain to me this decision; does Germany have so different trademark laws that Metro AG can bully its way in other markets where it doesn't even operate anymore just because it's been around so long?
I hope you aren't thinking that Microsoft should win because anything an American company wants to do should override the interests of foreigners.
I'm not American, I have no such bias here. Both Germans and Americans are foreigners to me.
Are you aware that metro basically means "acting gay" and is short for metrosexual and everyone in America knows that but you apparently?
I'd say it's just homophobics who think that way. "OHMYGODSOGAY, I MUST IMMEDIATELY DISTANCE MYSELF FROM IT!!" Atleast here in Finland metro means.... *wait for it* a train-like device running underground on tracks! No one associates it with metrosexuality.
What I don't understand is that Metro AG has nothing to do with operating system software, so why is Microsoft so afraid? There is absolutely no way of mistaking one for the other, they're not even in related markets let alone in the same one. Sure, a lawsuit would cost both parties some money, but it's totally clear-cut from where I sit that Microsoft would prevail, so changing the name now when people are already accustomed to calling it "Metro" just to please Metro AG seems terribly short-sighted.
Christ, next you'll be saying you don't like pink puppy dogs or something.
Well, I don't like pink, but I do like puppies, does that ruin my street-cred? Oh! I know, I know, I can still rescue the situation: you see, I like large, burly dogs, not these small, jabbering handbag-sized things that you can't even make a decent-sized meal out of! A dog ain't a dog unless it weighs 20kg+!
How about if the titles read out in court included "Anal Schoolboys 3", "Joey the Goat Fucker" and "2 grannies, 1 Goatse"?
What's wrong with the first title? As for the two others: I still wouldn't mind, the people who know me know I'm not into such and the people who don't know me are irrelevant.
No, but the actual amount shared is important when considering Fair Use. And in some countries -- like e.g. here in Finland -- your intent also plays a large role in court.
To augment your scenario a little: since you are allowed to share a certain portion of a copyrighted work up to a limit on the basis of Fair Use - laws you could likely argue that you must have shared content with a single entity over the limit for it to constitute copyright infringement. For example, if you share something with 100 people and the Fair Use - limit is 10% of the work but you only shared at max. 7% with any single individual you could argue that they all fell under Fair Use. 7% times 100 people would equal 700%, or 7 full copies worth of data, so if the court ruled that the previous defense was actually invalid you could still try to argue that you could only be held responsible for 7 cases of copyright infringement and that the litigant couldn't even prove that you actually ever shared a full copy -- remember, all the downloaded data could come from the same portion of the file(s), so even if you combined all the data uploaded together you'd still not get a single, working copy.
Alas, no one has ever actually tested any of these defenses in court.
Tell them that you are aware of your rights and since IP-addresses cannot be tied to individual people, only to locations, the only way they could prove you guilty would be to access your actual computer. As the burden of proof lies on them they'll have to manage to prove to court that it was you doing the downloading. Also, do mention that they'll need to be able to prove without doubt actual amounts downloaded and uploaded; there was a recent case in the U.S. ( I am only assuming you're from there as you didn't mention anything else ) where the judge declared that 10% of any work can be redistributed on Fair Use - basis, so you could quite likely use that as a defense in court and they'd have to prove reliably that you shared more than 10% of that work to a single entity. Also, never admit to anything, make certain to construct your sentences in a way that you're clearly speaking about you "supposedly" having done something or "per their claim" to have done something. And then just tell them to sod off.
Fucking your hand while watching people fucking just to fuck with an entity whose expertise is all about people fucking? That sounds like... *puts on her shades*... a fucking mess.
It's funny, lately I had a friend confess to me he was in deep shit with his girlfriend over an alleged "porn addiction" because he got caught surfing porn. I told him every man is addicted to porn. There is no such thing as "porn addiction", the truth is, there is masturbation addiction.
Actually, there is pornography addiction; some people just get so attached to porn that they can't get aroused at all by anything else and they go to unhealthy lengths to collect and consume porn. Addiction to masturbation is a separate thing, though you often find both issues in the same individual. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pornography_addiction
Now, before anyone jumps to some strange conclusions -- this is Slashdot, after all -- I'm definitely not saying masturbating even on daily basis is indicative of an addict nor that it is even slightly abnormal. In fact there's hardly anything more normal than masturbating; it's really a core instinct in us humans.
Women... you are full of shit. All of you are reading your versions of porn right now. It's called Fifty Shades of Wet Vagina.
Hey, I take offense to that, I'm female, you know? I have never read Fifty Shades of Grey nor do I plan to, nor do I like Twilight, either.
Here in Finland you should be perfectly fine if you simply download something, and even if you were using BitTorrent and ended up sharing something you could argue that your primary intent was to download the file(s) and this sharing was only a means to an end - the intent of your action tends to play a large role here, you see. However, this has never actually been tested in court, the only cases that have been to court have been about large-scale sharing and infringement, as such we do not really have a proper court judgment on that. In the Netherlands, however, it is clearly stated in the law that downloading something is legal, only the act of uploading/sharing it is illegal and the law is so clear on that that you'd only be wasting your time and money even trying to dispute that.
That is exactly the assumption why the old tests do not work, assuming that every single human has chromosomes neatly in logical pairs and no mutations that affect the end-result. The world, however, does not work like that, like e.g. there is a very good example of a person in the TFA who would otherwise be male due to her chromosomes, but her body is altogether incapable of using testosterone at all and as such she is a female instead; even if she injected herself with large doses of testosterone it wouldn't affect her in the least, yet as per your extremely naive comment she'd still have to compete with males.
I also used to date a person who was rather androgynous to the outside world as there were really no clear physical clues about this person's physical sex; facial features were not pronounced as they usually are with men, this person didn't have a large chest as is usually associated with men, there was no bodily hair, and yet this person also didn't have breasts, the hips were not pronounced as they are on females and so on. Also, this person's chromosomes were kind of screwy, indicating neither male nor female. Turns out this person was intersexual ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersex ) and was not even born with either kind of genitals, either. Now, how well does your naive assumption work now?
Huh? I've been sharing files over bluetooth for a couple of years, in both KDE and Windows.
You have been able to use Bluetooth file-sharing in GNOME2 for years now, but that functionality was never actually a part of GNOME2, it was provided by an outside package. This announcement just basically says the Mate - team has now made that functionality a part of the actual Mate desktop environment.
bluetooth is faster than Samba over wifi!
Bluetooth v1.1 has a maximum available bandwidth of 0.7 Mbit/s, v2.1 has a maximum available bandwidth of 2.1 Mbit/s and Bluetooth 3.0+HS and Bluetooth 4.0 have a theoretical bandwidth of 24Mbit/s, though that bandwidth is actually provided by Wifi, not the Bluetooth - chipset itself. If you really are getting higher speeds with Bluetooth than with Wifi then your wireless settings are screwed up or you're having some serious interference.
Of course, the Windows machine needs a third-party app to run the bluetooth dongle (kubuntu does not).
You must have some strange off-standard dongle. I have several ones and none of them have ever required installation of anything under Windows or Linux.
That I do not know nor do I bother to guess, either. I simply do not know much about OSX or what people expect from the latest release as I don't own a single Apple-device, it would be rather presumptuous of me to make any sorts of claims regarding that. Also, how should one even define "success" in this case? The size of installation-base? End-user satisfaction? Amount of expectations fulfilled? Profit generated? Those can all be viewed as successes in their own right, and atleast installation-base-wise Mountain Lion will be a success simply because a large number of people will buy the upgrade just because it's "new."
Actually, Waterworld-reference works exceedingly well for bringing about his point. Waterworld a lot of money in the beginning, but eventually failed to satisfy expectations.
Slashdot Mirror
What I find annoying about Firefox is that it has massive memory leaks and needs to be force-killed every few hours of use because it balloons to such a size that it starts killing the system it's running on. And that's pretty much a show stopper right there. There's no reason for a web browser to eat up 2GB of memory during regular use.
I have 11 tabs open right now and Firefox is only taking 368MB RAM. I'm fairly certain you're either exaggerating, trolling or you've got a misbehaving addon.
No it doesn't. Stumbled upon the concept implies the concept was NOT there before, and while researching a related matter, somone had the idea of radar, independantly. So, the quote does indeed suggest that the navy invented radar.
Incorrect. Stumbling upon something literally refers to the act of coming upon something; it does not imply existence of that something either way, not that that something existed before, nor that that something didn't exist before. You can stumble upon radar technology itself just as much as you can stumble upon the fact that someone else stumbled upon it.
This is Slashdot: there's no way of telling a troll from the average, gleefully ignorant, self-centered Slashdotter. When in doubt just ignore the whole thing, you likely have better things to do.
Wise choice. It's utter drivel, a bed knockoff of 9 1/2 weeks (which itself wasn't so great), poorly written, with a terrible premise. You know when you start thinking of the protagonist as "you stupid b*tch" and her love interest ass "what a fuckwit" you've failed to connect to the characters. Repetitive, trite "oh my!" moans from the protagonist's "inner goddess" (what tripe) add to the annoyance level. I won't even get into the cognitive dissonance required to believe you have any self worth (much less an "inner goddess") when you constantly orgasm from having a man treat you like shit.
That sounds more-or-less how I imagined the book to be, but the reason for why I never even tried to read the book is because I'm just not interested in pseudo-erotic books anyways, ie. it was not really even a choice since I'm not interested in books in that category.
I actually don't feel too sorry for today's women, so busy starving themselves into oblivion chasing rediculous media-driven notions of self-image, so desparate for male approval they betray their own political, social, and personal intrests, and throw each other under the bus, just so they won't be called a b*tch, or worse, a feminist.
Speaking of feminists I actually was just yesterday called a "gender traitor" by one because I dared to question the feminist movement and criticize things. Personally I try to aim for equality regardless of gender, not because of it, and thus my point of view apparently differs from theirs in several ways. It's the hypocrisy of things that drives me away from such movements, like if I were to mention the fact that men generally are paid slightly more than women in the exact same job I'd get huge amounts of applause and appraisal from feminists, but if I were to mention that men also generally receive much harsher punishments -- both in court and in work-life -- these same feminists either stick to strawmen, shift the discussion to something completely irrelevant or just plain, old attack me. As much as they don't like it I don't need to belong to the "girls' club" just because I have breasts and therefore I don't also need to drive their interests only when it comes to positive things; my morals and ideals dictate that everything should be equal, including the bad things, and I'm not going to compromise on that.
Oh well, this is getting really off-topic and I'm fairly certain no one here actually gives a sh*t about this stuff, so I'll just shut up now. Been an interesting thread, nevertheless.
Is it still homophobic if actual homosexuals hate the term
Yes. Homosexuals obviously aren't homophobic as long they've admitted to themselves that they are homosexuals and therefore their hatred of the term is irrelevant in this context.
Oops, did I just tear a hole on your angry gay rights post's logic?
Nope.
and I can tell you that being clear-cut from where you sit cuts no ice whatsoever with a German court.
Of course it doesn't. I am just hoping someone would explain to me this decision; does Germany have so different trademark laws that Metro AG can bully its way in other markets where it doesn't even operate anymore just because it's been around so long?
I hope you aren't thinking that Microsoft should win because anything an American company wants to do should override the interests of foreigners.
I'm not American, I have no such bias here. Both Germans and Americans are foreigners to me.
No, the point is that NOT everyone has porn.
That sounds awful, I feel terribly sorry for these people :'(
And that is irrelevant. I still say it's just homophobia talking and those people should just grow the f*ck up.
Would this one suit your needs?
o(*__*)o
/.........\
\O...8==O=D
Are you aware that metro basically means "acting gay" and is short for metrosexual and everyone in America knows that but you apparently?
I'd say it's just homophobics who think that way. "OHMYGODSOGAY, I MUST IMMEDIATELY DISTANCE MYSELF FROM IT!!" Atleast here in Finland metro means.... *wait for it* a train-like device running underground on tracks! No one associates it with metrosexuality.
What I don't understand is that Metro AG has nothing to do with operating system software, so why is Microsoft so afraid? There is absolutely no way of mistaking one for the other, they're not even in related markets let alone in the same one. Sure, a lawsuit would cost both parties some money, but it's totally clear-cut from where I sit that Microsoft would prevail, so changing the name now when people are already accustomed to calling it "Metro" just to please Metro AG seems terribly short-sighted.
Christ, next you'll be saying you don't like pink puppy dogs or something.
Well, I don't like pink, but I do like puppies, does that ruin my street-cred? Oh! I know, I know, I can still rescue the situation: you see, I like large, burly dogs, not these small, jabbering handbag-sized things that you can't even make a decent-sized meal out of! A dog ain't a dog unless it weighs 20kg+!
How about if the titles read out in court included "Anal Schoolboys 3", "Joey the Goat Fucker" and "2 grannies, 1 Goatse"?
What's wrong with the first title? As for the two others: I still wouldn't mind, the people who know me know I'm not into such and the people who don't know me are irrelevant.
No, but the actual amount shared is important when considering Fair Use. And in some countries -- like e.g. here in Finland -- your intent also plays a large role in court.
To augment your scenario a little: since you are allowed to share a certain portion of a copyrighted work up to a limit on the basis of Fair Use - laws you could likely argue that you must have shared content with a single entity over the limit for it to constitute copyright infringement. For example, if you share something with 100 people and the Fair Use - limit is 10% of the work but you only shared at max. 7% with any single individual you could argue that they all fell under Fair Use. 7% times 100 people would equal 700%, or 7 full copies worth of data, so if the court ruled that the previous defense was actually invalid you could still try to argue that you could only be held responsible for 7 cases of copyright infringement and that the litigant couldn't even prove that you actually ever shared a full copy -- remember, all the downloaded data could come from the same portion of the file(s), so even if you combined all the data uploaded together you'd still not get a single, working copy.
Alas, no one has ever actually tested any of these defenses in court.
Tell them that you are aware of your rights and since IP-addresses cannot be tied to individual people, only to locations, the only way they could prove you guilty would be to access your actual computer. As the burden of proof lies on them they'll have to manage to prove to court that it was you doing the downloading. Also, do mention that they'll need to be able to prove without doubt actual amounts downloaded and uploaded; there was a recent case in the U.S. ( I am only assuming you're from there as you didn't mention anything else ) where the judge declared that 10% of any work can be redistributed on Fair Use - basis, so you could quite likely use that as a defense in court and they'd have to prove reliably that you shared more than 10% of that work to a single entity. Also, never admit to anything, make certain to construct your sentences in a way that you're clearly speaking about you "supposedly" having done something or "per their claim" to have done something. And then just tell them to sod off.
Disclaimer: IANAL, though I <3 anal.
Fucking your hand while watching people fucking just to fuck with an entity whose expertise is all about people fucking? That sounds like... *puts on her shades* ... a fucking mess.
It's funny, lately I had a friend confess to me he was in deep shit with his girlfriend over an alleged "porn addiction" because he got caught surfing porn. I told him every man is addicted to porn. There is no such thing as "porn addiction", the truth is, there is masturbation addiction.
Actually, there is pornography addiction; some people just get so attached to porn that they can't get aroused at all by anything else and they go to unhealthy lengths to collect and consume porn. Addiction to masturbation is a separate thing, though you often find both issues in the same individual. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pornography_addiction
Now, before anyone jumps to some strange conclusions -- this is Slashdot, after all -- I'm definitely not saying masturbating even on daily basis is indicative of an addict nor that it is even slightly abnormal. In fact there's hardly anything more normal than masturbating; it's really a core instinct in us humans.
Women... you are full of shit. All of you are reading your versions of porn right now. It's called Fifty Shades of Wet Vagina.
Hey, I take offense to that, I'm female, you know? I have never read Fifty Shades of Grey nor do I plan to, nor do I like Twilight, either.
Here in Finland you should be perfectly fine if you simply download something, and even if you were using BitTorrent and ended up sharing something you could argue that your primary intent was to download the file(s) and this sharing was only a means to an end - the intent of your action tends to play a large role here, you see. However, this has never actually been tested in court, the only cases that have been to court have been about large-scale sharing and infringement, as such we do not really have a proper court judgment on that. In the Netherlands, however, it is clearly stated in the law that downloading something is legal, only the act of uploading/sharing it is illegal and the law is so clear on that that you'd only be wasting your time and money even trying to dispute that.
I wouldn't mind. Everyone knows I'm a regular, old perv, it'd just earn me some street-cred.
Call me old fashioned
I can think of plenty of much more suitable adjectives and terms for people like you, "old-fashioned" being probably the most benign.
XX = Woman
XY = Man
That is exactly the assumption why the old tests do not work, assuming that every single human has chromosomes neatly in logical pairs and no mutations that affect the end-result. The world, however, does not work like that, like e.g. there is a very good example of a person in the TFA who would otherwise be male due to her chromosomes, but her body is altogether incapable of using testosterone at all and as such she is a female instead; even if she injected herself with large doses of testosterone it wouldn't affect her in the least, yet as per your extremely naive comment she'd still have to compete with males.
I also used to date a person who was rather androgynous to the outside world as there were really no clear physical clues about this person's physical sex; facial features were not pronounced as they usually are with men, this person didn't have a large chest as is usually associated with men, there was no bodily hair, and yet this person also didn't have breasts, the hips were not pronounced as they are on females and so on. Also, this person's chromosomes were kind of screwy, indicating neither male nor female. Turns out this person was intersexual ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersex ) and was not even born with either kind of genitals, either. Now, how well does your naive assumption work now?
Huh? I've been sharing files over bluetooth for a couple of years, in both KDE and Windows.
You have been able to use Bluetooth file-sharing in GNOME2 for years now, but that functionality was never actually a part of GNOME2, it was provided by an outside package. This announcement just basically says the Mate - team has now made that functionality a part of the actual Mate desktop environment.
bluetooth is faster than Samba over wifi!
Bluetooth v1.1 has a maximum available bandwidth of 0.7 Mbit/s, v2.1 has a maximum available bandwidth of 2.1 Mbit/s and Bluetooth 3.0+HS and Bluetooth 4.0 have a theoretical bandwidth of 24Mbit/s, though that bandwidth is actually provided by Wifi, not the Bluetooth - chipset itself. If you really are getting higher speeds with Bluetooth than with Wifi then your wireless settings are screwed up or you're having some serious interference.
Of course, the Windows machine needs a third-party app to run the bluetooth dongle (kubuntu does not).
You must have some strange off-standard dongle. I have several ones and none of them have ever required installation of anything under Windows or Linux.
That I do not know nor do I bother to guess, either. I simply do not know much about OSX or what people expect from the latest release as I don't own a single Apple-device, it would be rather presumptuous of me to make any sorts of claims regarding that. Also, how should one even define "success" in this case? The size of installation-base? End-user satisfaction? Amount of expectations fulfilled? Profit generated? Those can all be viewed as successes in their own right, and atleast installation-base-wise Mountain Lion will be a success simply because a large number of people will buy the upgrade just because it's "new."
Actually, Waterworld-reference works exceedingly well for bringing about his point. Waterworld a lot of money in the beginning, but eventually failed to satisfy expectations.