Maybe I'm getting old, but I'm starting to think of all of this push for GNU, the Green Party, and the like as simple immaturity on the part of people who don't have enough other things to do in the real world.
I can't believe someone invented this. Surely you can all walk, no? Testament to how incredibly lazy some people are.
And I simply can't believe how unimaginative people are when these things come up. Are you seriously suggesting that there's no place for powered transporation?
Pardon me, but fuck you and your bicycle. What if I don't want to get sweaty and slimy and just want some basic transportation? What if I want to cruise along on the sidewalk with other pedestrians? Bicycles can't do that.
Anyway, I am so tired of the bicycle nazis coming out of the woodwork whenever the segway is mentioned. If you want to ride your bike, then fine, but stop with the bullshit that there's no place for powered transportation.
It's worth pointing out that the movie is by Michael Moore -- second only to Chomsky when it comes to biased, selective viewing of facts. I don't waste my time giving that clown any money, and recommend that others should bypass it also. Moore is an idiot, and yes, the messenger does make a difference even if the blind squirrel finds a few nuts. It's what he leaves out that's often important.
Discussion of how to cut off Netscape's air supply.
The other replier said this as well, but sheesh how naive are you? This is the language of marketing people.
I'm not going to particularly defend Microsoft in all aspects, but...
It is not merely enough for them to succeed. Everyone else MUST fail!
Big freaking deal. Guess what? I want my competitors to fail also!! OH MY GOD I am such a horrible person for wanting my products to be bought over my competitor's! Maybe I should just try and not get too many customers. I don't want to be mean to my competitors.
And what makes this all the more laughable is when you look at many Linux advocates. They are more blood thirsty than any Microsoft exec. It's not enough for Linux to succeed, they need Microsoft's charter to be revoked.
Well, it DID try to use an injunction against Lindows...that's not quite the same as a lawsuit, but I'd be careful about using the word NEVER, here.
Against the name Lindows. You might or might not agree with Microsoft's position, but it's a legitimate position. You'll note that they didn't sue against the product, just the name.
Meanwhile, a slew of other Windows workalike products (Samba, WINE, etc) continue to rock on.
The ability for my wife to walk into Best Buy and purchase "Hoyle Card Games". Or "Reader Rabbit Preschool".
Or buy a digital camera and use the included picture organizing software that my in-laws bought.
Of course, Quicken is unavailable. GnuCash is not a particularly "friendly" substitute for most people either. And until I can pay my bills over the Internet, it wouldn't be a substitute for me either.
I really could go on and on, but the point is that Linux is not mainstream and you can't get mainstream software.
In a recent ZDNet article, ZDNet write/predicts [com.com] that Linux will this year or perhaps next overtake Apple's OS to become the second most common desktop OS.
Not going to happen. Linux has no user-level applications to speak of. The Macintosh at least has some relatively comparable applications to Windows (although they are still a ghetto).
When Linux gets mainstream software developers porting software to it, then it will have a shot. Until then, it ain't gonna happen.
Once again: People use applications, not operating systems.
The memo is mildly interesting, but ESR is growing more shrill and childish with each passing year. GOOD LORD a company is exploring how to compete with other products?? ALERT THE PRESS.
Sheesh, maybe Microsoft is good for some things, and OSS is good for other things. And to talk like Microsoft is going to "lose" with $40 billion dollars in the bank is ludicrous at best.
Fah, ESR is not as annoying as RMS (that is, of course, impossible), but he seems to be heading down the path.
so when do we get the Top Ten Top Ten Stories of 2002?
Well, they don't want to bombard you with them, so they're waiting to give you the top entry on the top ten list of top ten lists of top ten stories of 2002. Those editors, always looking to save us time by giving us only the quality stories!
Though that is still mathematical. In fact, I don't believe you can encrypt without math.
It depends on how you define "mathematical", I suppose. I could create a purely mechanical encrypter by creating a message out of dots of a certain color, and then mixing dots of a whole bunch of other colors. You would decrypt the message by viewing the image through a particular color filter. You could argue that it's mathematical in nature, but then, everything is mathematical by that definition.
I think the original poster's use of the word mathematical was applying specific formulas to numeric encodings of a message, more along the lines of modern methods of cryptography.
I thought it was just a "special form of shorthand", not really actual encryption. I find it difficult to believe that he was doing hard-core mathematically-based encryption
Encryption doesn't have to mathematical. Anything that takes a message, applies a transformation to it and is reversible through another transformation can be said to be a cypher. I could make an alternate alphabet with funny symbols and do a 1-1 correspondence of the English alphabet and that would still be a cypher. A weak one, but still encrypted.
...Security through obscurity doesn't work:) I know, I know - that was awful.
Well, what's really awful about it is that this case has nothing to do with "security through obscurity". He coded his information, that code was cracked. That's normal and good standard practice encyryption. It was just weak encryption. STO would be as if his diary was unencrypted, but just hidden from direct view.
STO is not always a bad policy, by the way, like many want you to believe. But that's a topic for another time.
Uh, and you know that your number was lifted from your trash beeeecause....?
It was really the only rational explanation. I had multiple cards get used, so it couldn't have been some lone department store clerk. Where I lived at time, my trash faced an alley and we had a lot of dumpster divers regularly go through there.
Of course, the criminal masterminds used the cards for some mail order delivery, which made it easier to track them down.:)
It might take someone an extra hour to steal you information.
The point isn't to make it unrecoverable to hostile governments, the point is to make the criminal moron going through your trash bypass your trash because there aren't any easy pickings.
I don't want to live in a world where I have to shred everything I throw away.
Well, I don't want to live in a world where people break into my house either, but I still have locks on my doors.
Something tells me that if a criminal isn't worried about using stolen credit card numbers, then they won't be worried about breaking some privacy laws either.
Screw privacy: Speaking as someone who had my credit card numbers stolen from my trash, EVERYONE should have a shredder to shred bills. It's incredibly cheap insurance.
As far as people taking the rest of my garbage, they're welcome to it. Less I have to take to the curb!
Because I'm an omnivore, and I like meat. I really like meat. And you know what? I don't feel a shred of guilt about it, despite the militant's best efforts. It's normal and natural to eat meat, and is the way our bodies are designed to work.
I'm not going to go so far as to say life isn't worth living as a vegetarian, but it would be pretty damn close. There is no way in hell I would ever give up meat. Never. Ever.
If you want to deny yourself the pleasures of meat, then fine, but don't asking that question is like asking, "Why don't we all live in caves? Hell, millions of cave-men lived that way". Or "Why don't we all use 8080 processors? Hell, millions of engineers used them".
Enough......of this off-topic crap. I think everyone is tried of it. Can you quit?
I doubt anyone is paying attention at this point, but fine with me. I didn't really expect a "good God I now see the light!" reaction from you.
But wouldn't it be a great world if I did get that reaction?:)
Mostly I like to make detailed posts like that to correct misinformation for the benefit of the younger, impressionable Slashdotter, not so much out of an expectation that the person I'm responding to is going to suddenly change their whole outlook on life. The latter usually happens slowly and painfully.
You would be wondering why there weren't any laws to prevent something like that from happening.
This discussion is stale, but I have to answer this. HELL NO I wouldn't complain, and I sure as hell wouldn't complain to the government that I was "exploited". I went in with my eyes open, and I took a risk. Risk taking is the foundation of progress, and it irritates me that the government disincentives risk.
The only time I would complain is if another party breaks a contract, and there are specific remedies that can be used in those cases.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe I'm getting old, but I'm starting to think of all of this push for GNU, the Green Party, and the like as simple immaturity on the part of people who don't have enough other things to do in the real world.
Congratulations, and welcome to the real world. :)
I can't believe someone invented this. Surely you can all walk, no? Testament to how incredibly lazy some people are.
And I simply can't believe how unimaginative people are when these things come up. Are you seriously suggesting that there's no place for powered transporation?
Just like the Segway.
Spoken like someone who knows absolutely nothing about them. Segways are NOT dangerous on the sidewalks.
Pardon me, but fuck you and your bicycle. What if I don't want to get sweaty and slimy and just want some basic transportation? What if I want to cruise along on the sidewalk with other pedestrians? Bicycles can't do that.
Anyway, I am so tired of the bicycle nazis coming out of the woodwork whenever the segway is mentioned. If you want to ride your bike, then fine, but stop with the bullshit that there's no place for powered transportation.
It's worth pointing out that the movie is by Michael Moore -- second only to Chomsky when it comes to biased, selective viewing of facts. I don't waste my time giving that clown any money, and recommend that others should bypass it also. Moore is an idiot, and yes, the messenger does make a difference even if the blind squirrel finds a few nuts. It's what he leaves out that's often important.
Discussion of how to cut off Netscape's air supply.
The other replier said this as well, but sheesh how naive are you? This is the language of marketing people.
I'm not going to particularly defend Microsoft in all aspects, but...
It is not merely enough for them to succeed. Everyone else MUST fail!
Big freaking deal. Guess what? I want my competitors to fail also!! OH MY GOD I am such a horrible person for wanting my products to be bought over my competitor's! Maybe I should just try and not get too many customers. I don't want to be mean to my competitors.
And what makes this all the more laughable is when you look at many Linux advocates. They are more blood thirsty than any Microsoft exec. It's not enough for Linux to succeed, they need Microsoft's charter to be revoked.
Well, it DID try to use an injunction against Lindows...that's not quite the same as a lawsuit, but I'd be careful about using the word NEVER, here.
Against the name Lindows. You might or might not agree with Microsoft's position, but it's a legitimate position. You'll note that they didn't sue against the product, just the name.
Meanwhile, a slew of other Windows workalike products (Samba, WINE, etc) continue to rock on.
FUDs or sues them to death.
Name one company that Microsoft ever "sued to death". Microsoft has NEVER used the lawsuit as a weapon.
What's missing? What am I missing?
The ability for my wife to walk into Best Buy and purchase "Hoyle Card Games". Or "Reader Rabbit Preschool".
Or buy a digital camera and use the included picture organizing software that my in-laws bought.
Of course, Quicken is unavailable. GnuCash is not a particularly "friendly" substitute for most people either. And until I can pay my bills over the Internet, it wouldn't be a substitute for me either.
I really could go on and on, but the point is that Linux is not mainstream and you can't get mainstream software.
In a recent ZDNet article, ZDNet write/predicts [com.com] that Linux will this year or perhaps next overtake Apple's OS to become the second most common desktop OS.
Not going to happen. Linux has no user-level applications to speak of. The Macintosh at least has some relatively comparable applications to Windows (although they are still a ghetto).
When Linux gets mainstream software developers porting software to it, then it will have a shot. Until then, it ain't gonna happen.
Once again: People use applications, not operating systems.
The memo is mildly interesting, but ESR is growing more shrill and childish with each passing year. GOOD LORD a company is exploring how to compete with other products?? ALERT THE PRESS.
Sheesh, maybe Microsoft is good for some things, and OSS is good for other things. And to talk like Microsoft is going to "lose" with $40 billion dollars in the bank is ludicrous at best.
Fah, ESR is not as annoying as RMS (that is, of course, impossible), but he seems to be heading down the path.
so when do we get the Top Ten Top Ten Stories of 2002?
Well, they don't want to bombard you with them, so they're waiting to give you the top entry on the top ten list of top ten lists of top ten stories of 2002. Those editors, always looking to save us time by giving us only the quality stories!
Though that is still mathematical. In fact, I don't believe you can encrypt without math.
It depends on how you define "mathematical", I suppose. I could create a purely mechanical encrypter by creating a message out of dots of a certain color, and then mixing dots of a whole bunch of other colors. You would decrypt the message by viewing the image through a particular color filter. You could argue that it's mathematical in nature, but then, everything is mathematical by that definition.
I think the original poster's use of the word mathematical was applying specific formulas to numeric encodings of a message, more along the lines of modern methods of cryptography.
I thought it was just a "special form of shorthand", not really actual encryption. I find it difficult to believe that he was doing hard-core mathematically-based encryption
Encryption doesn't have to mathematical. Anything that takes a message, applies a transformation to it and is reversible through another transformation can be said to be a cypher. I could make an alternate alphabet with funny symbols and do a 1-1 correspondence of the English alphabet and that would still be a cypher. A weak one, but still encrypted.
Well, what's really awful about it is that this case has nothing to do with "security through obscurity". He coded his information, that code was cracked. That's normal and good standard practice encyryption. It was just weak encryption. STO would be as if his diary was unencrypted, but just hidden from direct view.
STO is not always a bad policy, by the way, like many want you to believe. But that's a topic for another time.
Uh, and you know that your number was lifted from your trash beeeecause....?
It was really the only rational explanation. I had multiple cards get used, so it couldn't have been some lone department store clerk. Where I lived at time, my trash faced an alley and we had a lot of dumpster divers regularly go through there.
Of course, the criminal masterminds used the cards for some mail order delivery, which made it easier to track them down. :)
In other words, you have a crappy job, no prospects and women can't stand the sight of you.
Therefore, you define happiness as containing none of those things.
Boy, that sure is profound.
It might take someone an extra hour to steal you information.
The point isn't to make it unrecoverable to hostile governments, the point is to make the criminal moron going through your trash bypass your trash because there aren't any easy pickings.
I don't want to live in a world where I have to shred everything I throw away.
Well, I don't want to live in a world where people break into my house either, but I still have locks on my doors.
Something tells me that if a criminal isn't worried about using stolen credit card numbers, then they won't be worried about breaking some privacy laws either.
Screw privacy: Speaking as someone who had my credit card numbers stolen from my trash, EVERYONE should have a shredder to shred bills. It's incredibly cheap insurance.
As far as people taking the rest of my garbage, they're welcome to it. Less I have to take to the curb!
Why not just be a vegetarian?
Because I'm an omnivore, and I like meat. I really like meat. And you know what? I don't feel a shred of guilt about it, despite the militant's best efforts. It's normal and natural to eat meat, and is the way our bodies are designed to work.
I'm not going to go so far as to say life isn't worth living as a vegetarian, but it would be pretty damn close. There is no way in hell I would ever give up meat. Never. Ever.
If you want to deny yourself the pleasures of meat, then fine, but don't asking that question is like asking, "Why don't we all live in caves? Hell, millions of cave-men lived that way". Or "Why don't we all use 8080 processors? Hell, millions of engineers used them".
"It's LAAAABalicious!"
"Have a slab o' the lab!"
Any others?
Huhhhuhhuh... laaaab grooownnn buuurrrgggerr... araarrrrraarah slurp slurp
Enough... ...of this off-topic crap. I think everyone is tried of it. Can you quit?
I doubt anyone is paying attention at this point, but fine with me. I didn't really expect a "good God I now see the light!" reaction from you.
But wouldn't it be a great world if I did get that reaction? :)
Mostly I like to make detailed posts like that to correct misinformation for the benefit of the younger, impressionable Slashdotter, not so much out of an expectation that the person I'm responding to is going to suddenly change their whole outlook on life. The latter usually happens slowly and painfully.
You would be wondering why there weren't any laws to prevent something like that from happening.
This discussion is stale, but I have to answer this. HELL NO I wouldn't complain, and I sure as hell wouldn't complain to the government that I was "exploited". I went in with my eyes open, and I took a risk. Risk taking is the foundation of progress, and it irritates me that the government disincentives risk.
The only time I would complain is if another party breaks a contract, and there are specific remedies that can be used in those cases.