/repl<Ctrl-Enter> <Ctrl-PgDn> /subj<Tab><Tab> t ype something stupid <Tab> <Tab> <Tab> <Enter> Ctrl-W (I didn't say it was easier, but it's mostly non-modal, so it gets easily automated)
Duh. I was just pointing out that for free software you can reach developers, if you try hard enough (emails are available everywhere), and _then_ some of them are easily pissed off. In the proprietary software world, you _never_ get to meet a developer, it's not a similar situation. At most, you get a trained consultant, that knows some black magic to make WebSphere MQ work with your damn Java app.
Address bar, Google bar, Statur bar is all I need. Alt-Left, Alt-Right, Ctrl-P handle the other things perfectly, and they don't force me to use that "mouse" thing I have lying around my desktop.
In the proprietary software world, it's difficult to get to talk to a developer.
You never get to annoy a developer to make him yell at you. You have to talk to several telemarketers armed with long troubleshooting checklists, when you have a bug. After a couple of rounds with that, you just give up, and buy some upgrade hoping they fixed the bug.
I never did that. The first time I was annoyed by proprietary software I got Slackware 3.4. Now I get "yelled at" in bugzilla. I rather enjoy it myself.
one has to admit that sometimes this kinda licence might give more freedom not only to the user, but to the developer(s) as well
That is not correct. The GPL takes some freedom away from the developers, and gives almost total freedom to the users.
Th BSD license, gives total freedom to the developer, but allows him to take freedom away from the user.
They are not equivalent in the amount of freedom they give to the user or the developer, you imply that the BSD license gives the same freedom to the user, but more to the developer, but I think it doesn't.
User freedom: GPL >= BSD Developer freedom: GPL = BSD
They already send them to women, who, in general, don't have penises. They don't seem to care (spammers, because Freud said that women _do_ care about not having penises, but then, Freud was just a troubled old man).
The GPL essentially is about preserving your rights as a user, at the expense of limiting your rights as a distributor.
There's of course, the special case where you write all the code yourself, and you can do whatever you want with that, obviously.
If you choose to use GPLed code, as a user, you can do mostly whatever you want.
As a distributor, if you distribute code based on GPLed code, it must be GPLed as a whole.
Again, the user after you, has the freedom to do whatever he wants. The idea is that if you didn't GPL the whole project, you would be taking freedom away from the user, and that's what the GPL is trying to prevent.
In the role of the distributor, the GPL doesn't care that much about you. In the role of a user, you have everything you want.
So, you can GPL all the code you want. If you want to use GPLed software, do the GPL. If you don't, do your own thing, or use BSD license software.
Of course. Since ancient Greece, there's no better way to resolve peoples conflicts than politics. Politics are good. They are about fighting for your ideas. I don't know why so many people in/. are afraid of politics, they are very important for nearly everything people do. You can be apolitic, but then you would be just accepting some other guys power. The only other option to politics is submission to some overlord. Even in software, there are ideas behind it, and I think it's a good thing that people fight for those.
That's why you have bugzilla. Lots of people get to talk about bugs, their seriousness, and the right way to correct them. Users and developers choose, and marketing has no saying in when they are fixed, or when the fix will be released.
Exactly, that's what I am talking about. I believe that it's common that people that want to talk about "copyright infringement" like to always say the word "piracy" because it aggravates the issue.
What I mean is that the word "piracy" attached to copyright infringement is used as a tool to make it look worse that it already is.
"Piracy", even in the copyright sense, means ripping of someone else, to say the least, and "copyright infringement" only means that at the worse.
The problem is that "piracy" is also used to describe DVD-ripping, and I don't understand how that can be described by a word used to describe for example airplane hijackers. Maybe that's the idea, you can make laws against copyright infringement, to stop "terrorists" that perform "piracy".
I do understand that it is correct. The problem I see is that I believe it's related to people stealing other people written works, like a editor that publishes other guy's work under his name, or something like that. Of course I understand why "pirate" could mean "copyright infringement" in that context. What I was challenging was the use of "pirate" to mean copyright infringement in every way, that is how it's used now. There are lots of cases where you infringe copyrights, but you don't rip off someone else's work. For example, strictly in my opìnion, when you play copyrighted music at your birthday, or lend your friends your DVDs, physically or even digitally (not your kazaa "friends", just some friend). I don't mind too much about software copying, because much of proprietary software "sharing" is just self-inflicted pain, in my opinion.
The issue is that RIAA/MPAA/* do capitalize on that term, that means much more than copyright infringement, trying to equal copyright infringement with theft. I understand that it's an expression that is very common, but I believe it's just free propaganda for those guys, like saying "diamonds are forever" is just free marketing for DeBeers (in fact they thought of that phrase themselves, I believe), even though it's a phrase that was used outside of billboards.
Anyway, it's just a thought, everytime I see that term "pirate" describing the full spectrum of copyright infringement issues, I have the urge to point out that not all copyright infringement (maybe none) is comparable to robbery, rape and theft, as the word could make you believe. It's just a bad habit I have.
It wouldn't have allowed pirating. Pirating is allowed by sail ships. You need a ship to become a pirate, and then you need to kill people for their bounty. The word piracy itself used when talking about copyrights means nothing. It's used with many different meanings, usually implying some kind of abuse. That's funny, because it's usual that the companies with those "piracy" claims are very fond of abusing their clients, or the ones that create their content, and call "pirates", meaning something like "abusers", the ones that do as they wish with the content they aquired. Many times I have been called a pirate by that kind of public statements, and I don't feel like one. I have never abused anybody, if that is what they mean. I don't know how to sail, either.
Well, I use to think like you, when I was 15 myself;) I liked Edlin at that time. I used the Turbo Pascal 4 editor, and it has the same interface that wordstar has, and the same that joe (the editor I use now) has now. I had to use lots of editors, because not all my work has been unix-based. I can use vim, effectively, but my performance with vim does not compare with my performance with joe, or with any editor I use, for example, the textbox where I am editing this right now. The idea of a modeless editor, like emacs, or joe, or Gedit, or oowriter, or this textbox, is a natural one. Command based editing might seem 133t, but direct manipulation is everywhere, and you need to use it everywhere. In any case, there is a world outside of vim, and it's modeless. Vim editing is hard, because you need to use different skills that the ones needed outside of vim. For example, when typing something in a newsgroup, looking for help, or helping someone, you need to edit your post in your news program with some set of skills, while browsing and/or editing your config files in vim with a different set of skills. That _is_ hard. Of course, you can do it effectively, but that's just wasted time. Vim doesn't give you anything that for example joe or jpico doesn't give you, and joe lets you use the text editing skills you need everywhere.
You are not faster with vim than with joe, because text editing speed is not bound by the interface overhead, at least with joe. Of course, vim is good because it is everywhere, and that's why it's necessary to know how to use it, but it's just self-inflicted pain, that you don't need to suffer.Take that as an advice from a former happy edlin user.
1 - 30 minutes is a lot of time for a text editor, now, in 2005, when people already know how to use lots of other editors that work the same among them.
2 - It takes 30 minutes to learn how you are supposed to use it. It takes much longer to stop making mode errors, and understanding the "command based" interface. It's very easy for people that know the commands, but are not accustomed to vim, to insert text when trying to insert commands, or the other way around. Of course, I learned to do it, I only use it in an old AIX system, and I use "less", that shares the navigation system, but I make that kind of errors, even though I catch them right away. I don't make that kind of errors in MSWin Notepad, or Wordpad, that I use even less often than vim. I understand you _can_ be an efective and happy vim user, but I still think that it would take a lot of work, and that it's pointless.
Ok/Cancel buttons are a thing from the past. Most non-win modern apps stopped using those a long time ago. You are presented with the verbs you want to perform in the form of buttons, at least in gnome and mozilla. That design is encouraged in the gnome guidelines. I believe Apple does something like that. Of course, the guy in the book talks about that. A nice bit is recplacing all checkboxes by radio buttons, so the user actually understands what will happen.
Slashdot Mirror
/repl /subj
type something stupid
Ctrl-W
(I didn't say it's easier, but it's mostly non-modal, so it gets easily automated)
Duh.
I was just pointing out that for free software you can reach developers, if you try hard enough (emails are available everywhere), and _then_ some of them are easily pissed off.
In the proprietary software world, you _never_ get to meet a developer, it's not a similar situation. At most, you get a trained consultant, that knows some black magic to make WebSphere MQ work with your damn Java app.
Thanks. That is the kind of posts I come hee to see.
Address bar, Google bar, Statur bar is all I need.
Alt-Left, Alt-Right, Ctrl-P handle the other things perfectly, and they don't force me to use that "mouse" thing I have lying around my desktop.
In the proprietary software world, it's difficult to get to talk to a developer.
You never get to annoy a developer to make him yell at you. You have to talk to several telemarketers armed with long troubleshooting checklists, when you have a bug. After a couple of rounds with that, you just give up, and buy some upgrade hoping they fixed the bug.
I never did that. The first time I was annoyed by proprietary software I got Slackware 3.4. Now I get "yelled at" in bugzilla. I rather enjoy it myself.
Do you have the skill to tell a female from a male chicken?
Their fuel "empty" sensors are of the kind used for HP cartridges.
one has to admit that sometimes this kinda licence might give more freedom not only to the user, but to the developer(s) as well
That is not correct.
The GPL takes some freedom away from the developers, and gives almost total freedom to the users.
Th BSD license, gives total freedom to the developer, but allows him to take freedom away from the user.
They are not equivalent in the amount of freedom they give to the user or the developer, you imply that the BSD license gives the same freedom to the user, but more to the developer, but I think it doesn't.
User freedom: GPL >= BSD
Developer freedom: GPL = BSD
They already send them to women, who, in general, don't have penises.
They don't seem to care (spammers, because Freud said that women _do_ care about not having penises, but then, Freud was just a troubled old man).
The GPL essentially is about preserving your rights as a user, at the expense of limiting your rights as a distributor.
There's of course, the special case where you write all the code yourself, and you can do whatever you want with that, obviously.
If you choose to use GPLed code, as a user, you can do mostly whatever you want.
As a distributor, if you distribute code based on GPLed code, it must be GPLed as a whole.
Again, the user after you, has the freedom to do whatever he wants. The idea is that if you didn't GPL the whole project, you would be taking freedom away from the user, and that's what the GPL is trying to prevent.
In the role of the distributor, the GPL doesn't care that much about you. In the role of a user, you have everything you want.
So, you can GPL all the code you want. If you want to use GPLed software, do the GPL. If you don't, do your own thing, or use BSD license software.
I understood that the parent was making a joke about his death being due to a bad interface design, involving yes/no boxes.
Maybe I was looking too hard.
Jef was my hero.
I admire some other guys, but no one as much as Jef.
Positive prejudice.
It's ok that we grow out of it.
Of course. /. are afraid of politics, they are very important for nearly everything people do. You can be apolitic, but then you would be just accepting some other guys power.
Since ancient Greece, there's no better way to resolve peoples conflicts than politics.
Politics are good. They are about fighting for your ideas.
I don't know why so many people in
The only other option to politics is submission to some overlord. Even in software, there are ideas behind it, and I think it's a good thing that people fight for those.
The guy hit two out of three.
Marcelo works in Brasil. Hit.
Marcelo doesn't work for Conectiva anymore. Miss.
garcia is an asshole. Hit.
That's enough "informative" for me.
That's why you have bugzilla.
Lots of people get to talk about bugs, their seriousness, and the right way to correct them. Users and developers choose, and marketing has no saying in when they are fixed, or when the fix will be released.
"copyright infringement" 1.610.000 pages
"copyright infringement" -piracy 1.480.000 pages
"copyright infringement case" 15.900
"copyright infringement case" -piracy 12.300
Exactly, that's what I am talking about.
I believe that it's common that people that want to talk about "copyright infringement" like to always say the word "piracy" because it aggravates the issue.
What I mean is that the word "piracy" attached to copyright infringement is used as a tool to make it look worse that it already is.
"Piracy", even in the copyright sense, means ripping of someone else, to say the least, and "copyright infringement" only means that at the worse.
The problem is that "piracy" is also used to describe DVD-ripping, and I don't understand how that can be described by a word used to describe for example airplane hijackers. Maybe that's the idea, you can make laws against copyright infringement, to stop "terrorists" that perform "piracy".
I do understand that it is correct.
The problem I see is that I believe it's related to people stealing other people written works, like a editor that publishes other guy's work under his name, or something like that. Of course I understand why "pirate" could mean "copyright infringement" in that context.
What I was challenging was the use of "pirate" to mean copyright infringement in every way, that is how it's used now. There are lots of cases where you infringe copyrights, but you don't rip off someone else's work. For example, strictly in my opìnion, when you play copyrighted music at your birthday, or lend your friends your DVDs, physically or even digitally (not your kazaa "friends", just some friend). I don't mind too much about software copying, because much of proprietary software "sharing" is just self-inflicted pain, in my opinion.
The issue is that RIAA/MPAA/* do capitalize on that term, that means much more than copyright infringement, trying to equal copyright infringement with theft. I understand that it's an expression that is very common, but I believe it's just free propaganda for those guys, like saying "diamonds are forever" is just free marketing for DeBeers (in fact they thought of that phrase themselves, I believe), even though it's a phrase that was used outside of billboards.
Anyway, it's just a thought, everytime I see that term "pirate" describing the full spectrum of copyright infringement issues, I have the urge to point out that not all copyright infringement (maybe none) is comparable to robbery, rape and theft, as the word could make you believe. It's just a bad habit I have.
It wouldn't have allowed pirating.
Pirating is allowed by sail ships.
You need a ship to become a pirate, and then you need to kill people for their bounty.
The word piracy itself used when talking about copyrights means nothing.
It's used with many different meanings, usually implying some kind of abuse. That's funny, because it's usual that the companies with those "piracy" claims are very fond of abusing their clients, or the ones that create their content, and call "pirates", meaning something like "abusers", the ones that do as they wish with the content they aquired.
Many times I have been called a pirate by that kind of public statements, and I don't feel like one. I have never abused anybody, if that is what they mean. I don't know how to sail, either.
Well, I use to think like you, when I was 15 myself ;)
I liked Edlin at that time.
I used the Turbo Pascal 4 editor, and it has the same interface that wordstar has, and the same that joe (the editor I use now) has now. I had to use lots of editors, because not all my work has been unix-based. I can use vim, effectively, but my performance with vim does not compare with my performance with joe, or with any editor I use, for example, the textbox where I am editing this right now. The idea of a modeless editor, like emacs, or joe, or Gedit, or oowriter, or this textbox, is a natural one. Command based editing might seem 133t, but direct manipulation is everywhere, and you need to use it everywhere.
In any case, there is a world outside of vim, and it's modeless.
Vim editing is hard, because you need to use different skills that the ones needed outside of vim. For example, when typing something in a newsgroup, looking for help, or helping someone, you need to edit your post in your news program with some set of skills, while browsing and/or editing your config files in vim with a different set of skills. That _is_ hard. Of course, you can do it effectively, but that's just wasted time. Vim doesn't give you anything that for example joe or jpico doesn't give you, and joe lets you use the text editing skills you need everywhere.
You are not faster with vim than with joe, because text editing speed is not bound by the interface overhead, at least with joe.
Of course, vim is good because it is everywhere, and that's why it's necessary to know how to use it, but it's just self-inflicted pain, that you don't need to suffer.Take that as an advice from a former happy edlin user.
Well, I like talking about interfaces.....
1 - 30 minutes is a lot of time for a text editor, now, in 2005, when people already know how to use lots of other editors that work the same among them.
2 - It takes 30 minutes to learn how you are supposed to use it. It takes much longer to stop making mode errors, and understanding the "command based" interface. It's very easy for people that know the commands, but are not accustomed to vim, to insert text when trying to insert commands, or the other way around.
Of course, I learned to do it, I only use it in an old AIX system, and I use "less", that shares the navigation system, but I make that kind of errors, even though I catch them right away. I don't make that kind of errors in MSWin Notepad, or Wordpad, that I use even less often than vim.
I understand you _can_ be an efective and happy vim user, but I still think that it would take a lot of work, and that it's pointless.
4. Don't be too insightful/interesting, too often.
Excelent karma is no good if you want mod points, I haven't had those for a looooooong time.
Now I always post with karma bonus, even when flaming, so I can go back to "good" or "great" karma.
3. Don't be funny. Funny doesn't give you karma.
Ok/Cancel buttons are a thing from the past.
Most non-win modern apps stopped using those a long time ago. You are presented with the verbs you want to perform in the form of buttons, at least in gnome and mozilla. That design is encouraged in the gnome guidelines. I believe Apple does something like that.
Of course, the guy in the book talks about that. A nice bit is recplacing all checkboxes by radio buttons, so the user actually understands what will happen.