Gore's undergraduate transcript from Harvard is riddled with C's, including a C-minus in introductory economics, a D in one science course, and a C-plus in another. "In his sophomore year at Harvard," the Post reported, "Gore's grades were lower than any semester recorded on Bush's transcript from Yale."
This is obvious character assassination! We know that Gore was good in school because his friends say he was, right?
Gimp is one, yes. However, looking at your post, I did notice that all of the other packages we've had issues with were not in free. Of course, non-free and non-us are where many of the most useful packages are.:(
Oh, well, maybe with the expiration of the RSA patent, some of that can move into the free section and maintainers will then care...
What ever happened to releasing software when it was ready. Is Debian the only distribution that does this?
Debian may claim to do this, but my wife has been using 2.2 for a bit, and there are scads of broken dependencies (by which I mean packages that don't install other packages that they need previously to installing themselves: something we were led to believe was Debian's biggest advantage over RPM-based systems). In most cases, an attempted install of something we haven't had the dependencies for resulted only in error messages.
there have been documented cases of end of the world theorists since at least 2000 years ago,
I'm guessing that this statement means you haven't actually considered the idea, or read any of the webpages about this. This isn't the end of the world, but more like the beginning of it. The inventor(s) of the automobile didn't bring about an end to the world, though buggy whip manufacturers might have thought so. It's just that most of the world is in the same position now as buggy whip makers were in 1900.
Well, they get an "A" from me, since I've never needed tech suppport from them. They promised DSL at my house (Heathrow, FL) within six weeks, and 13 days later I was up.:) Very, very quick. I've never had any downtime with them (that I noticed), even during the frequent thunderstorms that plague central Florida, though I was told to expect outages during them.
All right people, can we try not to completely flame Compaq (at least, until and unless they've blown us off, I mean)? Being polite and careful will go a long way toward producing results we want.
Yes, I know you guys all know this, but somehow it never seems to sink in...
They GPLed it not LGPLed. Which is funny because it is a library.
The "L" in LGPL no longer stands for "Library", but instead for "Lesser".
If you want to wrote a closed source app you still have to pay Troll Tech!
And this is as it should be: if you want to restrict the liberty of others, you have your own freedom restricted. Turn about is fair play.
But I just don't want everyone who is writting for linux to be forced to pay these guys money.
People writing freed code will not be forced to pay anyone; only those who restrict the freedom of users will need to pay, in turn. This seems appropriate, no?
would you mind if your wife were seduced by your best friend, but did not change her status regarding you? You're not losing anything...
I would mind (depends on the situation, I guess), but I certainly wouldn't believe anything had been stolen from me, except in the sense that she would theoretically have violated the marriage contract, if we had one that included "no sex with others" provisions.
In the current situation, though, most people have no marriage contracts at all (except those forced on them by the State), so this wouldn't be stealing.
You're stealing when and only when whatever you have stolen has been taken away from the victim. If they haven't lost anything, you haven't stolen it. Seems simple enough.;)
You're right, I've never used Perl for anything serious. OTOH, that's true with Lisp, Scheme, C, and Python, too, but those all make at least a little sense to the unlearned novice.
When I mentioned, above, that Perl seemed hard to pronounce, I wasn't kidding. It's *far* easier for me to mentally talk to myself about code in other languages, which means that I'm idly thinking about snippets of code and miscellaneous other features even while doing completely unrelated tasks. Unless I assigned specific non-name sounds to the various symbols used in Perl, it's very difficult to do that. This translates into having thought about other languages far more than Perl, so that I'm more comfortable in Python, Lisp, C, etc, even though Perl was the first one I seriously looked at and read tutorials for.
Maybe someone should come up with a pronunciation guide for Perl: How to Speak Perl, for Novices.;)
Perl - we see two languages that take different paths to making things easier for programmers [...] and perl through a more "human" language structure.
Excuse me? I think I prefer my programming language to be mostly pronouncable -- at least in theory. Perl looks more like line noise than phonics.:)
From the article: "Any idea what Orlando is like in the middle of July? Its a sauna. Its not LIKE a sauna its a sauna, if you scientifically analyzed the two environments, they'd be identical."
Um, I live in Orlando. It's not as bad as that. On the other hand, we do have something called "air conditioning" with which this fellow was apparently unfamiliar.:)
What if I published a list of homosexuals? And what if you were on that list? No crime there, but what if you weren't a homosexual? What if, because of that list, your wife left you and took the kids? There'd easily be grounds for a lawsuit then.
While that would be true in today's legal environment, I hope we can all agree that it shouldn't be grounds for a lawsuit. Why should I be able to sue you for something my wife did? In any case, lying shouldn't be a crime unless it was fraudulent (in which case, it's really theft, anyway).
Randall.
Re:You need some troll practice...
on
Linux And Beijing
·
· Score: 1
Am I incoherent because I argued that execution of criminals cuts down on crime and deaths of innocents?
Actually, you seemed to be arguing that execution of those who are in possession (of crack, I suppose) will save them from overdosing. I agree, it will. Is that an improvement? Nah.
Roughly half of the US still supports capital punishment for murderers. Are they fascists too? Why should we draw the line at the crime of murder? Especially when drug dealers and drug traffiking leads to deaths of all sorts?
While I'm no advocate of capital punishment (talk about being hard to say you're sorry!), I would think that there was a clear difference between putting someone to death for murder, and putting them to death for aggravated sales.
Every year, cars kill more people than drugs. Should we imprison and/or kill those who run car dealerships?
Currently computers force humans to act less like people and more like machines.
That is, they force humans to think clearly and logically about problems, leading to solutions more easily and quickly. Yeah, that's really a horrible thing, right?
Um, you don't need a credit card. If you have an E-gold account, you can use JHCloos to register or transfer a domain.
I am not affiliated with JHCloos, other than being a happy customer, but if you click on that E-gold link, I'll get some of the profits that E-gold would otherwise get (but no more outta your pocket). If you really hate that thought, use this: http://www.e-gold.com
If not, does any power which Congress has under the Constitution enable such protection?
Um...do you seriously believe that any attention is paid to the Constitution by Congress? They simply don't care. They have repeatedly violated every single one of the Bill of Rights, and pretty much ignore the rest whenever they feel like it.
Note that Occam didn't say that something was right because it was simple, but that if you have two answers that are both as good at explanation (that is, are both "right" as far as you can tell), it is better to go with the one that is simplest. This has nothing to do with which one is right, since it is a prior condition that both have to be equally good at explaining the evidence. It's just an easy-to-follow rule for ensuring that you don't waste your time. Since any problem can have any number of answers, choosing the simplest one saves time for other problems, and simply aids in using your time efficiently.
Further, science doesn't claim to have all the answers, and the best science usually follows an "I don't know". Science has been best at finding answers to questions that ask how things work, and is currently unable to answer questions that are asking why things happen, except when those question are really reducible to "how" questions.
Anyway, Occam's Razor isn't logic at all, still less "false" logic. It's a meta-rule for how to do logic in the first place.
Not only would I say that I've never had an experience that I would attribute to "God", but beyond that, I can't imagine an experience that I would attribute to "God", no matter how bizarre. Given what we (think we) know about the brain and computers, any experience that would make one believe that God exists could more plausibly be attributed to the existence of a simulation in which you are living. This explanation would require fewer complexities than introducing "God" into one's explanation of the world, no?
I would say that the first part of the quote, the substance of things hoped for, clarifies that "seen" is being used as a token for "experienced", in the same way that people use it in I'll believe that when I see it.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course, that turns out to be not quite true. This link points out the idiocy of having banned DDT.
Randall.
This is obvious character assassination! We know that Gore was good in school because his friends say he was, right?
Randall.
Oh, well, maybe with the expiration of the RSA patent, some of that can move into the free section and maintainers will then care...
Randall.
Debian may claim to do this, but my wife has been using 2.2 for a bit, and there are scads of broken dependencies (by which I mean packages that don't install other packages that they need previously to installing themselves: something we were led to believe was Debian's biggest advantage over RPM-based systems). In most cases, an attempted install of something we haven't had the dependencies for resulted only in error messages.
I think I'll stick with Mandrake, for now.
Randall.
I'm guessing that this statement means you haven't actually considered the idea, or read any of the webpages about this. This isn't the end of the world, but more like the beginning of it. The inventor(s) of the automobile didn't bring about an end to the world, though buggy whip manufacturers might have thought so. It's just that most of the world is in the same position now as buggy whip makers were in 1900.
Randall.
Randall.
Yes, I know you guys all know this, but somehow it never seems to sink in...
Randall.
The "L" in LGPL no longer stands for "Library", but instead for "Lesser".
If you want to wrote a closed source app you still have to pay Troll Tech!
And this is as it should be: if you want to restrict the liberty of others, you have your own freedom restricted. Turn about is fair play.
But I just don't want everyone who is writting for linux to be forced to pay these guys money.
People writing freed code will not be forced to pay anyone; only those who restrict the freedom of users will need to pay, in turn. This seems appropriate, no?
Randall.
would you mind if your wife were seduced by your best friend, but did not change her status regarding you? You're not losing anything...
I would mind (depends on the situation, I guess), but I certainly wouldn't believe anything had been stolen from me, except in the sense that she would theoretically have violated the marriage contract, if we had one that included "no sex with others" provisions.
In the current situation, though, most people have no marriage contracts at all (except those forced on them by the State), so this wouldn't be stealing.
Randall.
You're stealing when and only when whatever you have stolen has been taken away from the victim. If they haven't lost anything, you haven't stolen it. Seems simple enough. ;)
Randall.
Wow, you thought that? You haven't been here long, have you? ;)
Randall.
You're right, I've never used Perl for anything serious. OTOH, that's true with Lisp, Scheme, C, and Python, too, but those all make at least a little sense to the unlearned novice.
When I mentioned, above, that Perl seemed hard to pronounce, I wasn't kidding. It's *far* easier for me to mentally talk to myself about code in other languages, which means that I'm idly thinking about snippets of code and miscellaneous other features even while doing completely unrelated tasks. Unless I assigned specific non-name sounds to the various symbols used in Perl, it's very difficult to do that. This translates into having thought about other languages far more than Perl, so that I'm more comfortable in Python, Lisp, C, etc, even though Perl was the first one I seriously looked at and read tutorials for.
Maybe someone should come up with a pronunciation guide for Perl: How to Speak Perl, for Novices. ;)
Randall.
Excuse me? I think I prefer my programming language to be mostly pronouncable -- at least in theory. Perl looks more like line noise than phonics. :)
Randall.
Randall.
Um, I live in Orlando. It's not as bad as that. On the other hand, we do have something called "air conditioning" with which this fellow was apparently unfamiliar. :)
Randall.
While that would be true in today's legal environment, I hope we can all agree that it shouldn't be grounds for a lawsuit. Why should I be able to sue you for something my wife did? In any case, lying shouldn't be a crime unless it was fraudulent (in which case, it's really theft, anyway).
Randall.
Actually, you seemed to be arguing that execution of those who are in possession (of crack, I suppose) will save them from overdosing. I agree, it will. Is that an improvement? Nah.
Roughly half of the US still supports capital punishment for murderers. Are they fascists too? Why should we draw the line at the crime of murder? Especially when drug dealers and drug traffiking leads to deaths of all sorts?
While I'm no advocate of capital punishment (talk about being hard to say you're sorry!), I would think that there was a clear difference between putting someone to death for murder, and putting them to death for aggravated sales.
Every year, cars kill more people than drugs. Should we imprison and/or kill those who run car dealerships?
Randall.
That is, they force humans to think clearly and logically about problems, leading to solutions more easily and quickly. Yeah, that's really a horrible thing, right?
Randall.
Um, you don't need a credit card. If you have an E-gold account, you can use JHCloos to register or transfer a domain.
I am not affiliated with JHCloos, other than being a happy customer, but if you click on that E-gold link, I'll get some of the profits that E-gold would otherwise get (but no more outta your pocket). If you really hate that thought, use this: http://www.e-gold.com
If not, does any power which Congress has under the Constitution enable such protection?
Um...do you seriously believe that any attention is paid to the Constitution by Congress? They simply don't care. They have repeatedly violated every single one of the Bill of Rights, and pretty much ignore the rest whenever they feel like it.
Further, science doesn't claim to have all the answers, and the best science usually follows an "I don't know". Science has been best at finding answers to questions that ask how things work, and is currently unable to answer questions that are asking why things happen, except when those question are really reducible to "how" questions.
Anyway, Occam's Razor isn't logic at all, still less "false" logic. It's a meta-rule for how to do logic in the first place.
True. And? Are you suggesting that Occam's Razor is wrong? If so, please elaborate. :)
Not only would I say that I've never had an experience that I would attribute to "God", but beyond that, I can't imagine an experience that I would attribute to "God", no matter how bizarre. Given what we (think we) know about the brain and computers, any experience that would make one believe that God exists could more plausibly be attributed to the existence of a simulation in which you are living. This explanation would require fewer complexities than introducing "God" into one's explanation of the world, no?
I would say that the first part of the quote, the substance of things hoped for, clarifies that "seen" is being used as a token for "experienced", in the same way that people use it in I'll believe that when I see it.
Anyway, in the KJV, Hebrews 11:1 says: Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
If you click over to the KJV, and search for "evidence" in the New Testament, it's the only hit.