Classic Shell still working for me, Win10. Developer may not be able to keep up with MS constantly trying to defeat it. If not, now may be the time to give up on Windows completely and learn how to Linux. Damn. Damn it all to hell! I miss the old days of computing of freeware...
There's been enough shit going on with operating systems that I'm now thinking about signing up on Patreon for the first time to support Linux Mint. The only OS that still works the way I like.
I guess Microsoft's plan for an OS subscription is actually happening for me, the only difference being that their efforts are making me want to ensure that a viable alternative remains alive and well
I want them to gut Facebook like a fish, expose every crime and underhanded tactic the company has ever engaged in and fine them until it bankrupts the company.
I thought that, given Facebook is a legitimate threat to democracy (see USA, 2016) and that the cunt in charge of Facebook doesn't want to show up to answer the governments questions unless coerced, the government should have blocked Facebook from the country until the cunt showed up to be interrogated.
Yeah sure there's the VPN option for those who know how, but the average user would be bitching about losing their Facebook access because they don't know how to set up a VPN while Fuckerberg would be losing ad revenue from the regions where he's been blocked
Some of you might want to react to geo blocking as some sort of "big government" agenda that should be resisted, but this is already the norm when it comes to websites that enable piracy. Is enabling piracy a bigger threat than enabling attacks on democracy?
Swap “Microsoft” and “Apple” and the statements still hold true.
Perhaps I've lived in a bubble, but Apple is nothing like Microsoft - Examples pleas.
Since you asked, here's an example of how Apple forces shit on users and you just have to accept it. It's a minor issue but the first one that came to mind
When command tabbing on OSX, it used to switch between different app windows no matter what sort of apps they were, they're just a collection of open windows on the Mac desktop. It was changed sometime in 2015 I think, so now when command tabbing it switches between groups of windows, grouped by what sort of app they are (such as cmd tabbing to the terminal reveals ALL the terminal windows). This diverges from the expected behaviour on all other operating systems, but, you know, its Apple, so accept it or fuck off. I discovered that on a work Macbook, and after changing jobs I'm now running Linux and have no desire to use Apple products. My only use case for them now is to have a 'build machine' to compile apps for MacOSX or iOS. Requiring that I have an OSX machine to compile for iOS is also some Microsoft style lock in bullshit
Despite all of that, I would still choose Apple if my only choices are Windows PC or Apple device, because there's less of a headache to keep OSX running well, no adverts in the OS, and OSX updates are at least designed well enough to not fuck my machine up every 6 months
The news here is that we have _still_ not managed to assure any level of real skill in the people writing software. This cannot continue.
Correct, but to elaborate: The news here is that some framework vendors have provided a feature to unsuspecting developers of varying levels of ability, these unsuspecting developers are using the feature that can be reasonably expected to have been tested thoroughly by said vendor. Meanwhile, some of these vendors have written the same feature badly, and these unsuspecting developers who definitely don't have the time to code review the entire framework, and likely don't have access to the source and/or don't know what sort of problems to be looking for anyway, are blindly trusting the vendor to provide quality code.
Part of the problem is having several vendors all competing for developer mind share, providing their own abstractions on top of how_a_computer_actually_works, and also providing lock in so that the developer finds it hard or impossible to get rid of the framework, while another part of the problem is that some developers depend on their framework training wheels and never learn how to work without it (web development is especially rife with this)
There are dual socket motherboards with quad-SLI and up to 128GB ECC memory intended for desktop supercomputing. Dual socket AMD or Intel CPU's. Some will need an extra larger case (EATX).
A Threadripper based PC would handle this without needing dual socket. link
Maybe you just don't know what you are doing, and a competent person could run the same "big data sets you generate" on a decade old single machine.
Maybe you just don't know what he is doing, and in your ignorance you can't believe that *anyone* would need so much power for work, because *you* have never needed so much power for anything.
What will happen once with greater enablement in their children, the people realize the privacy implications of their decision?
Are you unaware that the latest Windows is also a privacy shit show? I'm sure even an Apple device is reporting *something* back to Cupertino. The only option to not be spied on these days is to install GNU/Linux or similar. That said, having privacy from some megacorp isn't a primary or even secondary need for "education devices"
The requirements are probably more like:
Cheap so it doesn't really matter if a kid fucks it up. Some idiot in this thread listed "cheap" as a drawback, yet it's a primary need for these devices. Cheap also leads to weaker hardware; guess which OS will suffer the most on weak hardware (Clue: it's not one of the *nix derivatives)
Needs to be locked down so a kid won't fuck the OS up and require IT support (even locking down the OS requires IT support if you're on Windows)
Automagically uploading to a server so a virus can't eat the homework, while still allowing offline work that will automagically upload later on when it has a network connection
Collaborative work: Google docs has been collaborative for years, so no mailing around different versions of a doc. The group just edits the doc locally and sees everyone else's update in real time. I'm sure MS Office would have copied this feature by now but honestly who gives a fuck about the product that did it second
And to the people claiming that these kids will be disadvantaged when they join the work force, you've got it backwards. The megacorps try and get people to use their products as kids so that they turn into adults who expect/use the same products in their work place. For example, the university I attended had free licenses of Office, Visual Studio Pro, Visio etc provided by MS to the IT students, as a means of locking us into their way of doing things (If you've already got Visual Studio then you're at least going to try writing your code in C# and your teachers know that they can expect you to produce and submit your work using the provided tools
The next generation wandering around like zombies with their heads fully back, big funnels in their mouths, waiting for their next food drop from the drones.
Won't happen while their heads are tilted down to stare at the phone
The problem is that all of the streaming platforms treat their relation to the general public as a One-To-Many relationship (meaning one of them and many of us)
The effect of this assumption is that we will spend our money on one of them to get access to shows that are exclusive to their platform along with shows that are on many platforms.
They also assume that we will either choose to sign up with their competitors for other exclusive shows as well or choose to not watch the competitors exclusives.
They seem to wilfully ignore that we could sign up with just one and pirate the rest from elsewhere, which can then lead to the thought "Why not just pirate everything?"
The reality is that the streaming platforms have a Many-To-Many relationship with the general public (meaning many of them and many of us)
When normalising a database with a many to many relation, we end up with a link table so that both "Many" sides have a single relation to the link table
In terms of streaming services, the many content producers need to link to a single streaming platform and the many consumers need to link to that same streaming platform
Of course they'll ignore that idea if it was ever presented to them, piracy will increase and they'll opt to deploy the lawyers against pirates instead to protect the many streaming platforms they've built, instead of actually trying to collaborate with their competitors on the platform and compete with the content on that platform
...people who spend the most total on computer hardware, even if few of these purchases are conspicuous high-budget laptops.
And it is probably important to note here that these aren't people who are opposed to spending a lot of money, or having nice things. They're opposed to spending $5,000 on a computer that can't even run Linux and the manufacturer will obsolete prematurely after only 1.5 to 2 years.
Anecdotal evidence, but can confirm. I have NEVER bought a laptop for myself, the only laptops I've ever used were provided by my employer (typically Lenovo, HP or Mac)
I have however been buying high end desktop PCs, for example my current 8 Core desktop was bought back in 2013 when most people only had 4 cores, and it has been serving me well for 5 years now, with some upgrades through the years such as GPU, SSD or RAM.
I'm already planning my next build which would involve whatever Zen2 based upgrade to the Threadripper 2950X is released next year, and I'd expect to keep that for another ~5 years. I would have bought the 2950X but I'm waiting for next years Threadripper so that the Spectre fixes are included.
It's a clever and important study that reminds us that 'deep learning' isn't really that deep
"Deep learning" is neither 'deep' nor 'learning', because the machines doing this work don't end up knowing anything.
It's just an advanced form of pattern matching, more akin to the sort of student who memorises loads of text, regurgitates it during an exam, and still doesn't grok any of that shit when the exam is over.
Also similar to the sort of coder that copy pastes from Stack Overflow. All 3 are good at appearing smart until asked to apply their knowledge to a new problem or even explain the thing they just repeated / copied.
It's correct that people want one point of access to a thing, but nobody really wants a monopoly.
Assuming that one inevitably leads to the other is part of the problem.
For example, with the video streaming sites, what we really need is for them to collaborate on the platform (how you login and watch shit) but compete on the content, meaning that if you watch American Gods on the shared platform, Amazon gets paid a share of your subscription, yet if you watch Luke Cage on the same platform, Netflix gets paid instead
That would be a great outcome for viewers but won't happen as long as these monopolist assholes can afford to be duplicating the effort of making yet another streaming service
The same sort of thing could play out for chat apps or social networks: common protocol with interoperable services built on top.
If you don't like how Facebook is fucking up your government, it should be trivial to leave them but take all of your data and existing social connections with you.
Of course, none of that will happen unless these companies are broken up into something smaller, and forced into a collaborative state
If you think that this is unreasonable, impossible etc, consider that the Internet you're on right now is designed in this way already.
Just imagine how bad things would be if you couldn't even send an email because the recipient is on Outlook but you're on GMail.
That's what the instant messaging market looks like right now.
Just wanted to say that the ISMs are useful when everyone understands their meaning, but are a distraction when some people do not know (or think they know) what it means.
Therefore, I'd say that the discussion on how society should be structured needs to happen outside of the realms of any current ideologies or ISMs, meaning that one could borrow ideas from whatever ideology (such as the notion of wealth/ownership), but specifically state what feature you're referring to instead of for example just invoking capitalism.
Competition is a powerful tool
So considering my comment above, I would argue that competition as a means of running society isn't the best solution for all, because to compete means that a few win while many others lose (a WIN/LOSE scenario). You can see the parallels of this in capitalism: for example in the console wars, where some win (MS, Sony, Nintendo) and others lose (Atari, Sega, etc)
I don't know what an ideal society would look like, but I would like to see collaboration instead of competition. By that I mean, multiple entities working together for a mutually beneficial outcome (a WIN/WIN scenario). That may be as small as a few people coding on an open source library, or as large as entire nations trying to colonise another planet or build a space station
Of course, such a notion is incompatible with greed, so that human need to Own All The Things needs to be fixed as well.
I know it sounds stupid, but that's the sort of feature that attracts kids / millennials these days, so the'd be shooting themselves in the market share eventually by not including it.
The counterpoint of course is that MS will kill Skype for business users if they implement it in the same way that they did on MSN messenger (giant fucking animations popping up on your desktop and causing slowdown)
If I were really a paid shill, I'd be posting as an anonymous coward, so you wouldn't know it was me.
And I'd deflect criticism by accusing others of being paid the shills.
Sounds like your behaviour:)
Considering that you accused me of being a shill after the MAGA idiot comment, I'm guessing that you're a MAGA idiot, or even the same MAGA idiot that I was replying to earlier
Yes. Exactly. Peer review worked great in Nazi Germany. The Soviet Union too. Likewise the DDR;
people would inform the Stasi on their comrades. Yes, peer review works really well.
Do you really want to live in a world where authority to determine what is right or wrong is given to someone in power? Really?
Go to North Korea then. See what it's like.
I may not agree with what you say, but I will fight for your right to say it.
Yeah I get that, I was responding in terms of access to knowledge, and the quality of that knowledge (and even the quality of that access) instead of political freedom to say whatever you want.
For political needs, I'd agree with the free speech idea.
For knowledge based needs, there does need to be a certain standard to be met before something can leave the realm of opinion or a hunch or hypothesis to be considered a fact. Peer review is great at this
Slashdot Mirror
Then forget about commercial software on *nix. And never complain about half baked FOSS alternatives.
Yeah, half baked like chromium. The corporations would never use that shit.
Now if Windows can be turned into an MS branded *nix distro things would be even better
... even if we have to brush every piece of coal by hand!
Brushing the coal to make "clean coal" sounds like a homeopathic idea.
Classic Shell still working for me, Win10. Developer may not be able to keep up with MS constantly trying to defeat it. If not, now may be the time to give up on Windows completely and learn how to Linux. Damn. Damn it all to hell! I miss the old days of computing of freeware...
There's been enough shit going on with operating systems that I'm now thinking about signing up on Patreon for the first time to support Linux Mint. The only OS that still works the way I like.
I guess Microsoft's plan for an OS subscription is actually happening for me, the only difference being that their efforts are making me want to ensure that a viable alternative remains alive and well
I want them to gut Facebook like a fish, expose every crime and underhanded tactic the company has ever engaged in and fine them until it bankrupts the company.
I thought that, given Facebook is a legitimate threat to democracy (see USA, 2016) and that the cunt in charge of Facebook doesn't want to show up to answer the governments questions unless coerced, the government should have blocked Facebook from the country until the cunt showed up to be interrogated.
Yeah sure there's the VPN option for those who know how, but the average user would be bitching about losing their Facebook access because they don't know how to set up a VPN while Fuckerberg would be losing ad revenue from the regions where he's been blocked
Some of you might want to react to geo blocking as some sort of "big government" agenda that should be resisted, but this is already the norm when it comes to websites that enable piracy. Is enabling piracy a bigger threat than enabling attacks on democracy?
Swap “Microsoft” and “Apple” and the statements still hold true.
Perhaps I've lived in a bubble, but Apple is nothing like Microsoft - Examples pleas.
Since you asked, here's an example of how Apple forces shit on users and you just have to accept it. It's a minor issue but the first one that came to mind
When command tabbing on OSX, it used to switch between different app windows no matter what sort of apps they were, they're just a collection of open windows on the Mac desktop. It was changed sometime in 2015 I think, so now when command tabbing it switches between groups of windows, grouped by what sort of app they are (such as cmd tabbing to the terminal reveals ALL the terminal windows). This diverges from the expected behaviour on all other operating systems, but, you know, its Apple, so accept it or fuck off. I discovered that on a work Macbook, and after changing jobs I'm now running Linux and have no desire to use Apple products. My only use case for them now is to have a 'build machine' to compile apps for MacOSX or iOS. Requiring that I have an OSX machine to compile for iOS is also some Microsoft style lock in bullshit
Despite all of that, I would still choose Apple if my only choices are Windows PC or Apple device, because there's less of a headache to keep OSX running well, no adverts in the OS, and OSX updates are at least designed well enough to not fuck my machine up every 6 months
The news here is that we have _still_ not managed to assure any level of real skill in the people writing software. This cannot continue.
Correct, but to elaborate: The news here is that some framework vendors have provided a feature to unsuspecting developers of varying levels of ability, these unsuspecting developers are using the feature that can be reasonably expected to have been tested thoroughly by said vendor. Meanwhile, some of these vendors have written the same feature badly, and these unsuspecting developers who definitely don't have the time to code review the entire framework, and likely don't have access to the source and/or don't know what sort of problems to be looking for anyway, are blindly trusting the vendor to provide quality code.
Part of the problem is having several vendors all competing for developer mind share, providing their own abstractions on top of how_a_computer_actually_works, and also providing lock in so that the developer finds it hard or impossible to get rid of the framework, while another part of the problem is that some developers depend on their framework training wheels and never learn how to work without it (web development is especially rife with this)
There are dual socket motherboards with quad-SLI and up to 128GB ECC memory intended for desktop supercomputing. Dual socket AMD or Intel CPU's. Some will need an extra larger case (EATX).
A Threadripper based PC would handle this without needing dual socket. link
Maybe you just don't know what you are doing, and a competent person could run the same "big data sets you generate" on a decade old single machine.
Maybe you just don't know what he is doing, and in your ignorance you can't believe that *anyone* would need so much power for work, because *you* have never needed so much power for anything.
For example, here's an alternative workload that would benefit from having lots of resources: Compiling Chromium requires at least 8GB of RAM. More than 16GB is highly recommended.
What will happen once with greater enablement in their children, the people realize the privacy implications of their decision?
Are you unaware that the latest Windows is also a privacy shit show? I'm sure even an Apple device is reporting *something* back to Cupertino. The only option to not be spied on these days is to install GNU/Linux or similar. That said, having privacy from some megacorp isn't a primary or even secondary need for "education devices"
The requirements are probably more like:
Cheap so it doesn't really matter if a kid fucks it up. Some idiot in this thread listed "cheap" as a drawback, yet it's a primary need for these devices. Cheap also leads to weaker hardware; guess which OS will suffer the most on weak hardware (Clue: it's not one of the *nix derivatives)
Needs to be locked down so a kid won't fuck the OS up and require IT support (even locking down the OS requires IT support if you're on Windows)
Automagically uploading to a server so a virus can't eat the homework, while still allowing offline work that will automagically upload later on when it has a network connection
Collaborative work: Google docs has been collaborative for years, so no mailing around different versions of a doc. The group just edits the doc locally and sees everyone else's update in real time. I'm sure MS Office would have copied this feature by now but honestly who gives a fuck about the product that did it second
And to the people claiming that these kids will be disadvantaged when they join the work force, you've got it backwards. The megacorps try and get people to use their products as kids so that they turn into adults who expect/use the same products in their work place. For example, the university I attended had free licenses of Office, Visual Studio Pro, Visio etc provided by MS to the IT students, as a means of locking us into their way of doing things (If you've already got Visual Studio then you're at least going to try writing your code in C# and your teachers know that they can expect you to produce and submit your work using the provided tools
The next generation wandering around like zombies with their heads fully back, big funnels in their mouths, waiting for their next food drop from the drones.
Won't happen while their heads are tilted down to stare at the phone
The problem is that all of the streaming platforms treat their relation to the general public as a One-To-Many relationship (meaning one of them and many of us)
The effect of this assumption is that we will spend our money on one of them to get access to shows that are exclusive to their platform along with shows that are on many platforms.
They also assume that we will either choose to sign up with their competitors for other exclusive shows as well or choose to not watch the competitors exclusives.
They seem to wilfully ignore that we could sign up with just one and pirate the rest from elsewhere, which can then lead to the thought "Why not just pirate everything?"
The reality is that the streaming platforms have a Many-To-Many relationship with the general public (meaning many of them and many of us)
When normalising a database with a many to many relation, we end up with a link table so that both "Many" sides have a single relation to the link table
In terms of streaming services, the many content producers need to link to a single streaming platform and the many consumers need to link to that same streaming platform
Of course they'll ignore that idea if it was ever presented to them, piracy will increase and they'll opt to deploy the lawyers against pirates instead to protect the many streaming platforms they've built, instead of actually trying to collaborate with their competitors on the platform and compete with the content on that platform
...people who spend the most total on computer hardware, even if few of these purchases are conspicuous high-budget laptops.
And it is probably important to note here that these aren't people who are opposed to spending a lot of money, or having nice things. They're opposed to spending $5,000 on a computer that can't even run Linux and the manufacturer will obsolete prematurely after only 1.5 to 2 years.
Anecdotal evidence, but can confirm. I have NEVER bought a laptop for myself, the only laptops I've ever used were provided by my employer (typically Lenovo, HP or Mac)
I have however been buying high end desktop PCs, for example my current 8 Core desktop was bought back in 2013 when most people only had 4 cores, and it has been serving me well for 5 years now, with some upgrades through the years such as GPU, SSD or RAM.
I'm already planning my next build which would involve whatever Zen2 based upgrade to the Threadripper 2950X is released next year, and I'd expect to keep that for another ~5 years. I would have bought the 2950X but I'm waiting for next years Threadripper so that the Spectre fixes are included.
It's a clever and important study that reminds us that 'deep learning' isn't really that deep
"Deep learning" is neither 'deep' nor 'learning', because the machines doing this work don't end up knowing anything.
It's just an advanced form of pattern matching, more akin to the sort of student who memorises loads of text, regurgitates it during an exam, and still doesn't grok any of that shit when the exam is over.
Also similar to the sort of coder that copy pastes from Stack Overflow. All 3 are good at appearing smart until asked to apply their knowledge to a new problem or even explain the thing they just repeated / copied.
It's correct that people want one point of access to a thing, but nobody really wants a monopoly.
Assuming that one inevitably leads to the other is part of the problem.
For example, with the video streaming sites, what we really need is for them to collaborate on the platform (how you login and watch shit) but compete on the content, meaning that if you watch American Gods on the shared platform, Amazon gets paid a share of your subscription, yet if you watch Luke Cage on the same platform, Netflix gets paid instead
That would be a great outcome for viewers but won't happen as long as these monopolist assholes can afford to be duplicating the effort of making yet another streaming service
The same sort of thing could play out for chat apps or social networks: common protocol with interoperable services built on top.
If you don't like how Facebook is fucking up your government, it should be trivial to leave them but take all of your data and existing social connections with you.
Of course, none of that will happen unless these companies are broken up into something smaller, and forced into a collaborative state
If you think that this is unreasonable, impossible etc, consider that the Internet you're on right now is designed in this way already.
Just imagine how bad things would be if you couldn't even send an email because the recipient is on Outlook but you're on GMail.
That's what the instant messaging market looks like right now.
âoelock her upâ
Is that Finish?
No, it's iPhonish.
With more and more people claiming that what OS you're running is irrelevant nowadays, you'd think it would've made some headway.
Knowing that Windows comes pre installed and most people lack the desire and/or ability to fuck with their PC because "It's already working",
I would not expect Linux to make any headway on the desktop now, or at any point in the future unless it comes pre installed.
The only consumer platform where Linux is dominant right now is on phones, because it came pre installed with Android.
Typing this on Linux Mint because I replaced Windows the day I got this laptop.
If a majority of "average" PC users were to do the same, all the spyware shit in Win10 would likely be disabled by MS in a matter of weeks.
And you know that's not going to happen.
If you're hungry, you're offered two and you take both, that's just hunger. If you're NOT hungry and you still take two, that's greed.
but when I read about the ISMs
Just wanted to say that the ISMs are useful when everyone understands their meaning, but are a distraction when some people do not know (or think they know) what it means.
Therefore, I'd say that the discussion on how society should be structured needs to happen outside of the realms of any current ideologies or ISMs, meaning that one could borrow ideas from whatever ideology (such as the notion of wealth/ownership), but specifically state what feature you're referring to instead of for example just invoking capitalism.
Competition is a powerful tool
So considering my comment above, I would argue that competition as a means of running society isn't the best solution for all, because to compete means that a few win while many others lose (a WIN/LOSE scenario). You can see the parallels of this in capitalism: for example in the console wars, where some win (MS, Sony, Nintendo) and others lose (Atari, Sega, etc)
I don't know what an ideal society would look like, but I would like to see collaboration instead of competition. By that I mean, multiple entities working together for a mutually beneficial outcome (a WIN/WIN scenario). That may be as small as a few people coding on an open source library, or as large as entire nations trying to colonise another planet or build a space station
Of course, such a notion is incompatible with greed, so that human need to Own All The Things needs to be fixed as well.
core races have already started.
Begun the core war has
The South would rise again!
Only if you consider fucking up to be a rise. "rise" and "up" refer to the same direction so I can see how that would confuse you.
No support for user-defined GIFs. etc.
Yeah, that's fucking important...
I know it sounds stupid, but that's the sort of feature that attracts kids / millennials these days, so the'd be shooting themselves in the market share eventually by not including it.
The counterpoint of course is that MS will kill Skype for business users if they implement it in the same way that they did on MSN messenger (giant fucking animations popping up on your desktop and causing slowdown)
Tyger-ZA is a paid shill it seems.
If I were really a paid shill, I'd be posting as an anonymous coward, so you wouldn't know it was me.
And I'd deflect criticism by accusing others of being paid the shills.
Sounds like your behaviour :)
Considering that you accused me of being a shill after the MAGA idiot comment, I'm guessing that you're a MAGA idiot, or even the same MAGA idiot that I was replying to earlier
Yes. Exactly. Peer review worked great in Nazi Germany. The Soviet Union too. Likewise the DDR; people would inform the Stasi on their comrades. Yes, peer review works really well.
Hello. MSM is FAKE news.
MAGA! WWG1WGA.
A wild MAGA idiot appears!
Do you really want to live in a world where authority to determine what is right or wrong is given to someone in power? Really?
Go to North Korea then. See what it's like.
I may not agree with what you say, but I will fight for your right to say it.
Yeah I get that, I was responding in terms of access to knowledge, and the quality of that knowledge (and even the quality of that access) instead of political freedom to say whatever you want.
For political needs, I'd agree with the free speech idea.
For knowledge based needs, there does need to be a certain standard to be met before something can leave the realm of opinion or a hunch or hypothesis to be considered a fact. Peer review is great at this