I can do that while coding college projects. Come to think of it, quantum logic might have something to do with the results, like when I spot awful pieces of code that I would swear I didnt write.
No I don't. There is someone catering to people like you, it would be RedHat, SuSE, or Mandrake, they want to get people excited in order to make a buck. That's good, but in general, developers dont care about your type. If they help you, good, if you dont like it, it's a pity.
That is not an intelligent thing to say. If RedHat sells a GNU/Linux/RedHat system, and calls it "Linux", that doens't make them the authority on the meaning of the word "linux". Linux is a kernel, and not an operating system, knowing that is _your_ duty. Nobody has the right to be ignorant.
You described a big part of my ideal world. The incentive to invest in research would still stand. Einstein didn't have a patent on his equations, (maybe that would have spared some millon lives, if patents could be enforced against governments) Euler has no patents, Knuth either, as I recall, Lagrange. Lack of patents in their fields didn't stop them, I don't think it could stop anyone. On the other hand, as a result of no patents, I can work with software using other people ideas, and not reinventing them
Nonsense. Patents protect only the one who has a lot of money to defend them in court (the big companies) and harms the one who doesn't (the not-so-big companies, and individuals).
Anyway, software patents and ideas are mostly trivial and incremental, that defeats the whole purpose of patents, which is not the protection of the inventor. Patents sole purpose is encouraging inventors not to keep their ideas secret by providing them a short term artificial monopoly on their implementation, and that monopoly is what needs protection (15 years or something). Anyway, protection is not the purpose of patents, is the medium that is used to achieve the goal of making industry processes well documented and available to everyone in a reasonably short time (about 15 years).
In software, most ideas are obvious, so the original model doesn't even apply. Most ideas will be useless in 15 years, so society helps the inventor, and gets nothing in return. More importante yet, software patents are incremental and obvious, so they dont accelerate developement, they stop it, what defeats the whole purpose of patent law.
Re:Does this work for non native speakers?
on
Can You Raed Tihs?
·
· Score: 1
I am native to Uruguay, spanish speaking, and it was n't difficult. The real problem was trying to read scrambled spanish ( with the perl thingy ), spanish words are longer, and I bet we read in chunks or something like that ( that and the fact that the perl script tends to put together the same letter, what leads to unnatural patterns ).
3DWM is more like it. It uses VNC to map windows to surfaces, and uses a 3d environment that you can model and populate. Not quite ready (I doubt it will ever be) for mainstream use, but nice to play with, and useful for research.
I am an RMS fanboy, and I am not _obsessed_ with avoiding proprietary software. I _prefer_ avoiding it, its an ethical issue. Its a shame that the US people pays no attention to RMS, given how visionary he has been all these years. He has an interesting point of view, even if he is a bit rough when defending it.
So that is the real problem with open source software adoption!! Gecko crashes big vendor computers. Until they can use Mozilla safely, big vendors are not going to pre-load an open source system with their hardware!
1) Create an HTML page describing your experience. 2) Use keywords and clear title so that people will find you. 3) Submit to Google. 4) Submit to some sites that cover the topics specific to your case. Most of the online publications will gladly accept free content, if it matches their topic. 5)... 6) Profit!!
In fact, in my country (Uruguay), Hondas are pretty good pimpin' material. GMs, VW and Fords are manufatured in Brazil and Argentina, and not so expensive, but Hondas (Prelude, Civic Hatchback) and Subarus (Impreza) are from Japan, expensive and rare. Ok, a High-end Subaru Impreza 4WD, turbocharged costs 65000 US $ here, so there is a reason why they are rare.
Antipiracy??? "Los piratas atacan naves!!" (RMS last Saturday in a local free software conference, in Uruguay)
Pirates attack ships!
Non authorized copying of software is not comparable to attacking ships.
It does not make any sense comparing unauthorized copying with theft, pillage and rape.
The best way to fight the most important threats to our freedom is to start realizing that IP is not an inalienable right, such as life of freedom, and threatening IP is not comparable to threatening life, or freedom./rant
If you had RTFA, you would know that the article was supposed to be funny, as the RoboSweep is a toy, not a robot, lacking a processor where you could run Linux.
No, if you release under the BSD license, it does not have to be free over its ntire lifetime. The catch is how you define "lifetime". The FSF says that all derivative work must remain free. With BSD, anybody can take the software and sell it as proprietary software, with the subsequent loss to the user, who is the one the FSF wants to protect.
You have a point with the small buttons, but the whole display can be resized easily. Icons are bad, of course, I would keep the ones used to select the view type, and replace all the others with text labels. And many buttons have text labels, anyway, which is gooooood. The non standard interface is a gooood thing, also, because standard means similar to windows, or similar to 3dStudio, or similar to GTK, which are baaaad. Interfaces need to be non standard to be good. In my case, it took many hours to get me comfortable with the UI, and it is easy for me now. There is a difference between a good and easy interface and one that you can catch easily. For the latter you need to make it similar to something you already now, not necesarily good or easy. Having to read a manual or experiment for a while has nothing to do with an interface not being easy, it means it is just not familiar to you, and that might be a good thing.
I *DO* think I am special and I am better than most people!! Don't we all think that??
Anyway, I think you missed the point. I dont think more people is bad, I think it is good, provided they are smart and can take care of their environment. I meant that smarter people are good for themselves and their peers, so I want more smart people. And incidentally, being smart *will* get you laid, eventually, and not being awful can help too, so I can make smart people that will be able to breed with a partner they choose, producing more smart people.
I know that it is mostly not in the genes, but genes can help.
I will create a race of super-humans!! you cant stop me!!!
1) I have always thought about adopting instead of breeding. There is a problem, though. I think that as a couple, both my girlfriend and I have what I would call good genes. Mostly high IQ and good looks, what I think are the most important genetic advantages nowadays (mankind needs more intelligent people that actually get to breed and multiply). Of course money is more important, but I am working on it. What I mean is that I dig the idea of adopting, but my "contribution" might be better if I breed. Any thoughts??
Slashdot Mirror
I can do that while coding college projects. Come to think of it, quantum logic might have something to do with the results, like when I spot awful pieces of code that I would swear I didnt write.
Want to get me excitied about Linux ...
No I don't.
There is someone catering to people like you, it would be RedHat, SuSE, or Mandrake, they want to get people excited in order to make a buck. That's good, but in general, developers dont care about your type. If they help you, good, if you dont like it, it's a pity.
That is not an intelligent thing to say. If RedHat sells a GNU/Linux/RedHat system, and calls it "Linux", that doens't make them the authority on the meaning of the word "linux". Linux is a kernel, and not an operating system, knowing that is _your_ duty. Nobody has the right to be ignorant.
You described a big part of my ideal world.
The incentive to invest in research would still stand. Einstein didn't have a patent on his equations, (maybe that would have spared some millon lives, if patents could be enforced against governments) Euler has no patents, Knuth either, as I recall, Lagrange. Lack of patents in their fields didn't stop them, I don't think it could stop anyone.
On the other hand, as a result of no patents, I can work with software using other people ideas, and not reinventing them
You forgot direct chip interconnect for that beowulf cluster of yours
Nonsense.
Patents protect only the one who has a lot of money to defend them in court (the big companies) and harms the one who doesn't (the not-so-big companies, and individuals).
Anyway, software patents and ideas are mostly trivial and incremental, that defeats the whole purpose of patents, which is not the protection of the inventor. Patents sole purpose is encouraging inventors not to keep their ideas secret by providing them a short term artificial monopoly on their implementation, and that monopoly is what needs protection (15 years or something). Anyway, protection is not the purpose of patents, is the medium that is used to achieve the goal of making industry processes well documented and available to everyone in a reasonably short time (about 15 years).
In software, most ideas are obvious, so the original model doesn't even apply. Most ideas will be useless in 15 years, so society helps the inventor, and gets nothing in return. More importante yet, software patents are incremental and obvious, so they dont accelerate developement, they stop it, what defeats the whole purpose of patent law.
I am native to Uruguay, spanish speaking, and it was n't difficult. The real problem was trying to read scrambled spanish ( with the perl thingy ), spanish words are longer, and I bet we read in chunks or something like that ( that and the fact that the perl script tends to put together the same letter, what leads to unnatural patterns ).
3DWM is more like it. It uses VNC to map windows to surfaces, and uses a 3d environment that you can model and populate. Not quite ready (I doubt it will ever be) for mainstream use, but nice to play with, and useful for research.
I am an RMS fanboy, and I am not _obsessed_ with avoiding proprietary software. I _prefer_ avoiding it, its an ethical issue. Its a shame that the US people pays no attention to RMS, given how visionary he has been all these years. He has an interesting point of view, even if he is a bit rough when defending it.
Dumbasses. The first Charlie's Angel's movie had the best combination of women I had seen. Balance has been lost.
So that is the real problem with open source software adoption!!
Gecko crashes big vendor computers. Until they can use Mozilla safely, big vendors are not going to pre-load an open source system with their hardware!
That would be the flux capacitor
That would be fresh air (C) SCO.
1) Create an HTML page describing your experience.
2) Use keywords and clear title so that people will find you.
3) Submit to Google.
4) Submit to some sites that cover the topics specific to your case. Most of the online publications will gladly accept free content, if it matches their topic.
5)
6) Profit!!
In fact, in my country (Uruguay), Hondas are pretty good pimpin' material. GMs, VW and Fords are manufatured in Brazil and Argentina, and not so expensive, but Hondas (Prelude, Civic Hatchback) and Subarus (Impreza) are from Japan, expensive and rare. Ok, a High-end Subaru Impreza 4WD, turbocharged costs 65000 US $ here, so there is a reason why they are rare.
RTFA, The guy didnt get the EULA, and had a hard time getting his money back.
Symantec has added an antipiracy technology
/rant
Antipiracy??? "Los piratas atacan naves!!" (RMS last Saturday in a local free software conference, in Uruguay)
Pirates attack ships!
Non authorized copying of software is not comparable to attacking ships.
It does not make any sense comparing unauthorized copying with theft, pillage and rape.
The best way to fight the most important threats to our freedom is to start realizing that IP is not an inalienable right, such as life of freedom, and threatening IP is not comparable to threatening life, or freedom.
If you had RTFA, you would know that the article was supposed to be funny, as the RoboSweep is a toy, not a robot, lacking a processor where you could run Linux.
-1 Gross
No, if you release under the BSD license, it does not have to be free over its ntire lifetime. The catch is how you define "lifetime". The FSF says that all derivative work must remain free. With BSD, anybody can take the software and sell it as proprietary software, with the subsequent loss to the user, who is the one the FSF wants to protect.
If they are Linux vulnerabilities they _must_ be in the kernel, because that is the only thing Linux is!
You have a point with the small buttons, but the whole display can be resized easily. Icons are bad, of course, I would keep the ones used to select the view type, and replace all the others with text labels. And many buttons have text labels, anyway, which is gooooood. The non standard interface is a gooood thing, also, because standard means similar to windows, or similar to 3dStudio, or similar to GTK, which are baaaad.
Interfaces need to be non standard to be good.
In my case, it took many hours to get me comfortable with the UI, and it is easy for me now.
There is a difference between a good and easy interface and one that you can catch easily. For the latter you need to make it similar to something you already now, not necesarily good or easy.
Having to read a manual or experiment for a while has nothing to do with an interface not being easy, it means it is just not familiar to you, and that might be a good thing.
I *DO* think I am special and I am better than most people!! Don't we all think that??
Anyway, I think you missed the point. I dont think more people is bad, I think it is good, provided they are smart and can take care of their environment. I meant that smarter people are good for themselves and their peers, so I want more smart people. And incidentally, being smart *will* get you laid, eventually, and not being awful can help too, so I can make smart people that will be able to breed with a partner they choose, producing more smart people.
I know that it is mostly not in the genes, but genes can help.
I will create a race of super-humans!! you cant stop me!!!
Copyright ingringement might be the next reason to conquer Middle Eastern countries, if the trend continues.
1) I have always thought about adopting instead of breeding.
There is a problem, though. I think that as a couple, both my girlfriend and I have what I would call good genes. Mostly high IQ and good looks, what I think are the most important genetic advantages nowadays (mankind needs more intelligent people that actually get to breed and multiply). Of course money is more important, but I am working on it. What I mean is that I dig the idea of adopting, but my "contribution" might be better if I breed.
Any thoughts??