Well, there is not such thing as linux/FOSS fanbois.
There are the Linux people, and the Open Source people, people who care about technical stuff, and who do not care about politics, if they can have their source.
Then, there are Free Software zealots, like me ( I think that is the right wording ), and most of us, including RMS, are OK with people making money off software and other stuff. For instance, even Stallman isn't such a big fan of copylefted books, he even edited a traditional one.
_Then_ there are people who are against people making money off culture.
_Then_ there are people who coulnd't care less, but hate DRM and stuff for technical reasons.
The four groups do not have a lot of people in common, so there is no point in making an argument against that straw man. It's hard to categorize people, maybe you can divide people between those who think like you, and the rest.
I was refering to a lot of people I know who hated MS, once were Google fanbois and used to think Google would cure cancer for free, and that Google would not turn "evil".
Well, as you said, they are just another corporation, trying to make money, looking after their shareholders. I didn't say it was wrong (I'm not saying the opposite, either), I just said it's not that awesome anymore.
The fact that there is at least one planet in the universe hosting intelligent life means that the terms are not zero.
I think that is a nice insight. Of course we know it's highly improbable for other being to be there. But if you look at it, the difference between zero inhabited planet and one inhabited planet is infinitely larger than the difference between one and two.
no, not as originally presented by Drake, it calculates the "number of extraterrestrial civilizations in our galaxy". Earth is not included.
I think the GP makes a good point. Even if Drake didn't say it the right way, there is experimental proof that intelligent life can happen. In fact, the probability of life existing in any given planet is definitely more than zero, even for planets like Mercury or Jupiter. Of course, it doesn't mean there actually are any extraterrestrials, much less ones who could communicate with us.
Not much of an argument, but what about brand recognition? Google arguably has the most recognized brand name in the entire World, and tech-savvy people generally trust Google and view them as the anti-"evil, money hungry corporation".
I don't know what your definition of tech-savvy people is, but the people around me I can call "tech-savvy" are ceasing to like Google.
Well, this story is about Google censoring the web for Chinese people, and then retreating because they got hurt themselves. I see a crack in the awesomeness.
Native Mexicans are not organized in tribes. Most Mexicans are descendants of Mexicas, even people in the government. In Central America, the genocide was not complete.
Well, reading myself again, it looks like I live in North Korea or something. I was talking about a South American country, we had a dictatorship in the seventies, mostly because it was the trend in the region, but that ended twenty five years ago. Our current political system is very democratic, at least in comparison with developed countries, but freedom has to be guarded always.
In fact, about "dissapearances", Facebook is a lot worse than this kind of thing. People who were in danger in my country used to hide with acquaintances of acquaintances, making it hard for state intelligence to find them and kill them. Now that an easily accesible database links you to all you possible escapes, dissidence has turned a lot harder.
While you are right, and you are not forced to register to use the Internet, the anonymous space is narrowing. It's not government restrictions, but market forces. Facebook knows who everybody is, and who their friends are. Mobile devices do identify themselves, and having a SIM, they _can_ confirm your identity, and mobile internet usage is increasing. Notebooks and netbooks are becoming more prevalent every day. It will be very easy to force a common ID once everybody buys their computer already built, just for the sake of something like DRM. Then you give the gift of some free media, in exchange from identifying yourself, and voilà, you have everybody and their mother's identity. Those who refuse to identify themselves must be pirates or pederasts. We know those people have no rights, so it will be easy to raid their homes to protect the children and the starving authors.
So, while this story is sad, it's not very much unlike what it is going to happen everywhere else.
This fear is the problem. Using a CLI is not irritating. It's just a different way of doing things.
With a little education, your average joe sixpack could be proficient with the cli. It's just that he doesn't want to.
Using a cli doesn't give you geek cred. I'm sorry if i've offended anyone. It happens to be a more direct way of interacting with your hardware. that's all.
I don't think a CLI is necessarily a more direct way to interact with hardware. GUIs are supposed to be easier because they involve direct manipulation. The command line gives the possibility to issue commands to let the computer do the task. For example, when I say: find | grep '_public.pdf$' | xargs -n 1 lpr I'm telling the computer to print my files. When a GUI user searches the files and then selects, right clicks and prints, they are more like doing it themselves. It looks more direct that way.
Enough with the shouting random words. Esp. when you don't have a lot of interesting stuff to say.
In fact, most people do hate Windows, and they love Google Search. And while Windows is a nice easy to use GUI, Google Search is a CLI. But it's easier to use that CLI than to use the beautiful GUI they have.
It's not that CLI or GUI are harder/easier by themselves. It's that some jobs are more suited for a GUI, and some others are better for a CLI, and it's pretty much proven that people can adapt to either.
Jobs not a good programmer. Gates not a great programmer. To be filthy rich you need something else, talent to get filthy rich, or maybe if you start filthy rich it can also help.
Well, I don't know about the US, but my country has laws about transparency that say you should say what you do with taxpayers money. Government organizations need to have a website where they publish that kind of info. It's easy to make the case that you are supposed to tell the public what software you are using, so they have an idea of how you invest your resources.
Also, many games are measured in 100-yards. American football (not soccer), the 100-yard dash, etc. Well 100 meters is a bit farther than 100 yards... What do you want? Re-calculate all the distances to be the fractional equivalent to meters? That's just dumb.
Soccer is not a sport!! Association Football is the most valuable heritage (apart from the railroads) that we got from the English in South America. You shouldn't be putting new names on other people's sports. Otherwise, you'll hear us doing the same with yours: "oh yeah, Sissy-Ball players look funny, with their padding and all"
About the Wikipedia article, what I mean is that there is reference bias.
The Maletinazo article is very well constructed, but most of its references are newspapers, most of them with a strong political bias. In the case of Argentinian media, they are at war with the current government. It's good to cite them, but they are not the revealed truth. I am not fixing that article, because it would take a lot of work, and I don't have a strong political interest in that, but I don't think it's ok.
In the case of the Operación Cóndor article, some of the references are official, declassified NSA files saying themselves what the US did in South America, and how the supported coups and offered support for overthrowing democratic presidents.
I don't think all sources are created alike. I understand the US were not supposed to jail Antonini Wilson, but the whole process looked too favourable to the guy. Anyhow, what looks fishy is that the guy didn't get extradited to Argentina at least for money laundering, where he is required. I might understand not sending the guy to Venezuela, for political reasons, but Argentina is not Venezuela.
I'm not actually saying that the guy was an agent, I only say that there is so much political interest in the whole event, by all actors involved, that it's not possible to get the cold facts. No explanation is good enough for me in this case, and everybody is suspect, because all hypotheses are plausible.
Fujimori, Alan Garcia I, Nestor Kirchner, Carlos Menem, Luis Alberto Lacalle, Pinochet, Stroessner, Collor. Guatemalan presidents at least until 2002. Noriega. In no particular order.
_I_ dislike Uribe a lot more than Chavez, also.
With the 20 year restriction, Chavez might make top ten for some. I was thinking 40 years, including guys like Bordaberry and Pacheco from Uruguay.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, there is not such thing as linux/FOSS fanbois.
There are the Linux people, and the Open Source people, people who care about technical stuff, and who do not care about politics, if they can have their source.
Then, there are Free Software zealots, like me ( I think that is the right wording ), and most of us, including RMS, are OK with people making money off software and other stuff. For instance, even Stallman isn't such a big fan of copylefted books, he even edited a traditional one.
_Then_ there are people who are against people making money off culture.
_Then_ there are people who coulnd't care less, but hate DRM and stuff for technical reasons.
The four groups do not have a lot of people in common, so there is no point in making an argument against that straw man. It's hard to categorize people, maybe you can divide people between those who think like you, and the rest.
I was refering to a lot of people I know who hated MS, once were Google fanbois and used to think Google would cure cancer for free, and that Google would not turn "evil".
Well, as you said, they are just another corporation, trying to make money, looking after their shareholders. I didn't say it was wrong (I'm not saying the opposite, either), I just said it's not that awesome anymore.
Maybe, but you were responding to a guy who said:
The fact that there is at least one planet in the universe hosting intelligent life means that the terms are not zero.
I think that is a nice insight. Of course we know it's highly improbable for other being to be there. But if you look at it, the difference between zero inhabited planet and one inhabited planet is infinitely larger than the difference between one and two.
Me too.
Sure but dude, he's looking for an intelligent girlfriend. No intelligent woman will try to prove him wrong.
You don't know that for sure.
He might be just looking to get laid, and might succeed.
no, not as originally presented by Drake, it calculates the "number of extraterrestrial civilizations in our galaxy". Earth is not included.
I think the GP makes a good point.
Even if Drake didn't say it the right way, there is experimental proof that intelligent life can happen.
In fact, the probability of life existing in any given planet is definitely more than zero, even for planets like Mercury or Jupiter.
Of course, it doesn't mean there actually are any extraterrestrials, much less ones who could communicate with us.
Not much of an argument, but what about brand recognition? Google arguably has the most recognized brand name in the entire World, and tech-savvy people generally trust Google and view them as the anti-"evil, money hungry corporation".
I don't know what your definition of tech-savvy people is, but the people around me I can call "tech-savvy" are ceasing to like Google.
Well, this story is about Google censoring the web for Chinese people, and then retreating because they got hurt themselves. I see a crack in the awesomeness.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saramago
Native Mexicans are not organized in tribes. Most Mexicans are descendants of Mexicas, even people in the government. In Central America, the genocide was not complete.
Anyhow, RTFA, it's not about that.
Well, reading myself again, it looks like I live in North Korea or something.
I was talking about a South American country, we had a dictatorship in the seventies, mostly because it was the trend in the region, but that ended twenty five years ago.
Our current political system is very democratic, at least in comparison with developed countries, but freedom has to be guarded always.
hmmmmmm
Postgres is a bid harder than Mysql, to install and configure.
As a developer, though, PostgreSQL is beautiful.
In fact, about "dissapearances", Facebook is a lot worse than this kind of thing.
People who were in danger in my country used to hide with acquaintances of acquaintances, making it hard for state intelligence to find them and kill them. Now that an easily accesible database links you to all you possible escapes, dissidence has turned a lot harder.
Think of the children!!
Freedom has a cost. Grow up. If everybody's freedom comes at the cost of criminals freedom, it's better than the alternative.
While you are right, and you are not forced to register to use the Internet, the anonymous space is narrowing.
It's not government restrictions, but market forces.
Facebook knows who everybody is, and who their friends are.
Mobile devices do identify themselves, and having a SIM, they _can_ confirm your identity, and mobile internet usage is increasing.
Notebooks and netbooks are becoming more prevalent every day. It will be very easy to force a common ID once everybody buys their computer already built, just for the sake of something like DRM.
Then you give the gift of some free media, in exchange from identifying yourself, and voilà, you have everybody and their mother's identity. Those who refuse to identify themselves must be pirates or pederasts. We know those people have no rights, so it will be easy to raid their homes to protect the children and the starving authors.
So, while this story is sad, it's not very much unlike what it is going to happen everywhere else.
This fear is the problem. Using a CLI is not irritating. It's just a different way of doing things.
With a little education, your average joe sixpack could be proficient with the cli. It's just that he doesn't want to.
Using a cli doesn't give you geek cred. I'm sorry if i've offended anyone. It happens to be a more direct way of interacting with your hardware. that's all.
I don't think a CLI is necessarily a more direct way to interact with hardware. GUIs are supposed to be easier because they involve direct manipulation. The command line gives the possibility to issue commands to let the computer do the task.
For example, when I say: find | grep '_public.pdf$' | xargs -n 1 lpr
I'm telling the computer to print my files.
When a GUI user searches the files and then selects, right clicks and prints, they are more like doing it themselves. It looks more direct that way.
Enough with the shouting random words. Esp. when you don't have a lot of interesting stuff to say.
In fact, most people do hate Windows, and they love Google Search. And while Windows is a nice easy to use GUI, Google Search is a CLI. But it's easier to use that CLI than to use the beautiful GUI they have.
It's not that CLI or GUI are harder/easier by themselves. It's that some jobs are more suited for a GUI, and some others are better for a CLI, and it's pretty much proven that people can adapt to either.
On my 3 Ubuntu machines (work/work/home) I never had to use the CLI.
I _do_ use it, but only because I like grep and stuff, but I never _had_ to_ use it.
Never the less, it's always scary when humans play god. Something is going to happen eventually, so should be really careful about it.
I hate to break this to you, but there's no one left to play god if we don't do it.
Jobs not a good programmer. Gates not a great programmer.
To be filthy rich you need something else, talent to get filthy rich, or maybe if you start filthy rich it can also help.
Well, I don't know about the US, but my country has laws about transparency that say you should say what you do with taxpayers money.
Government organizations need to have a website where they publish that kind of info. It's easy to make the case that you are supposed to tell the public what software you are using, so they have an idea of how you invest your resources.
Also, many games are measured in 100-yards. American football (not soccer), the 100-yard dash, etc. Well 100 meters is a bit farther than 100 yards... What do you want? Re-calculate all the distances to be the fractional equivalent to meters? That's just dumb.
Soccer is not a sport!!
Association Football is the most valuable heritage (apart from the railroads) that we got from the English in South America.
You shouldn't be putting new names on other people's sports. Otherwise, you'll hear us doing the same with yours: "oh yeah, Sissy-Ball players look funny, with their padding and all"
Well, if they came here looking for latin women, Montevideo is the wrong place.
Thank you for the "metropolis" status. Montevideo is a 1.5 million people city. It's real nice, but not a metropolis.
About the Wikipedia article, what I mean is that there is reference bias.
The Maletinazo article is very well constructed, but most of its references are newspapers, most of them with a strong political bias. In the case of Argentinian media, they are at war with the current government. It's good to cite them, but they are not the revealed truth. I am not fixing that article, because it would take a lot of work, and I don't have a strong political interest in that, but I don't think it's ok.
In the case of the Operación Cóndor article, some of the references are official, declassified NSA files saying themselves what the US did in South America, and how the supported coups and offered support for overthrowing democratic presidents.
I don't think all sources are created alike.
I understand the US were not supposed to jail Antonini Wilson, but the whole process looked too favourable to the guy. Anyhow, what looks fishy is that the guy didn't get extradited to Argentina at least for money laundering, where he is required. I might understand not sending the guy to Venezuela, for political reasons, but Argentina is not Venezuela.
I'm not actually saying that the guy was an agent, I only say that there is so much political interest in the whole event, by all actors involved, that it's not possible to get the cold facts. No explanation is good enough for me in this case, and everybody is suspect, because all hypotheses are plausible.
Fujimori, Alan Garcia I, Nestor Kirchner, Carlos Menem, Luis Alberto Lacalle, Pinochet, Stroessner, Collor. Guatemalan presidents at least until 2002. Noriega. In no particular order.
_I_ dislike Uribe a lot more than Chavez, also.
With the 20 year restriction, Chavez might make top ten for some. I was thinking 40 years, including guys like Bordaberry and Pacheco from Uruguay.
Free market comments are fun.
They look beautiful, but they don't describe the reality.
In this case I have a reason why:
Patents.