Somehow, I doubt it. Just a little perspective. Based on the current position of Earth and Mars:
Distance from Earth to the closest star in Orion (HD 30652): 26.176 lightyears
Distance from Earth to Mars: 0.0000278306 lightyears.
So, the distance from Earth or Mars is 0.00010632% the distance from Earth to 30652.
Basically, we're so damned far from Orion that, no matter where you were in the *solar system*, it would probably look the same.
Incidentally, if you want to check this out for yourself (ie, look at the constellations from orbit around Mars), and you have a hardware-accelerated 3D card, I would highly recommend trying out Celestia, a very impressive space simulator
But, as I've mentioned in another post, this Nintendo patent doesn't cover something like PocketNES. It does cover, say, GBonGBA, or the Game Gear portions of DrSMS. But it doesn't apply to console-on-GBA emulators, as the patent only covers emulating a "handheld video game platform". So, I'm thinking there's gotta be more to this... I just can't figure out what it is...
Well, given that this patent covers "emulating a handheld video game platform" on a "low-capability platform", which doesn't apply to PocketNES or anything like it (since the NES wasn't a handheld video game platform), I'm thinking Nintendo has other motivations...
I don't think there's really an idealogical difference between the (old Tories) and the Liberals, at least fiscally.
Well, I live in Alberta, so I'd have to disagree a bit.:) Of course, Klein is probably one of the most fiscally conservative government leaders in all of Canada, so my view of the Conservative Party might be a bit coloured.:)
What would happen if an American party seriously hinted at implementing public health-care?
Actually Clinton (both of them) hinted at the idea for a while there, as you might recall. It went over like a lead balloon, as you'd probably expect.
The Reform-Tory merger will change things, but overall I hope that the old guard take control over the (new) Conservative party so that there's a reasonable alternative to Liberal east of Manitoba.
Well, we'll see. The way things are going, Harper very well may be the new leader. And if that's the case, it might be hard for the new party to shed the image of being just a reformed Reform Party, which would significantly reduce their chances in the East. But, we shall see... I'm left-leaning, personally, but a little more competition at the Federal level can only be a good thing for democracy in Canada.
Of course it had something to do with it. But this investigation will deal with the Canadian subsidiary, thus puts this battle squarely in Canadian territory where the FTC has absolutely no power.
Oh, and one other thing. You may love your NDP party, but the people in BC probably don't. And the people of Saskatchewan weren't all that please with them either, as was evident in the last election. So, please, quite twisting facts. All the parties have their problems. There is no magic bullet. Although, a minority government might be *a* solution...
Oh please. The Liberal's in Canada are considerably more left than the Republicans in the US. Of course, the Conservative Party here in Canada is also considerably more left than the Republicans in the US. This probably has something to do with less religious fundamentalism in this country.
The real difference between the Liberal's and the Conservatives in Canada is their fiscal, rather than social policies. Socially, they're very close (though, the conservatives are, unsuprisingly, slightly more socially conservative (see same-sex marriage, marijuana laws, etc)). Fiscally, they are comparable to the Dems/Reps in the US, except the Conservatives in Canada want to cut spending along with taxes, rather than just the latter.
As for the rest of it, well, that remains to be seen. There was plenty of corruption in the previous Liberal governments. Will that continue? I don't know. Would it be better with an NDP or Conservative government? I'm not so sure...
Huh? You have hard disks in your computer that aren't accessable when you boot? If I put a storage device in my computer it's because I want access to it. That's why I put it in. Having it mounted automatically for me is a logical time saver. It's bad design to ask a user to confirm they want the standard expected behaviour.
Well, where should it be mounted, then? What if I want to mount the second partition of may hard drive to/home? Or my USB camera to/camera. How can the system know these things unless I *tell* it? Oh, wait, you're used to Windows where the OS does things *to* you, rather than *for* you.
As for the rest of your post, I'm not even going to bother to respond, since every one of your complaints is incredibly dated. Honestly, maybe you should try a *recent* version of <insert Linux distro here>, rather than basing your impressions on something that's, what, a least 5 years old, if not more. Seriously, Mozilla 0.9.7?? Good lord!
Incidentally, if you want to try out Linux again, you don't need to "waste... money" to do it. It's free. Unlike, say, Windows XP.
They did. Although, I find it quite annoying. If I have a hard disk in my machine, I don't expect it to be automatically mounted. The same goes with any other storage device (eg, USB mass storage, floppies, etc). Why should CD's behave differently?
Last time I checked Mozilla didn't do that.
How hard did you look? Hell, *when* did you look? As of Mozilla version 1.4.1, which isn't exactly new, this feature has been present. I'm pretty sure it was in there even before that, although I'm not going to take the time to confirm.
The question seems to me to be why is a useful feature like that not present when it's been in the windows version of the same software for more than a year?
It is present. You appear to have missed it somehow. Perhaps you should look harder next time.
All the system admin tasks in one place. In some sort of consistant organization.
Well, on this Fedora box that I have in front of me, if I open the panel menu at the bottom of the screen and select "System Settings", I'm presented a menu with options to configure pretty much everything a naive user would need to configure. Is this not easy enough for you? And in my experience, most other distros have something similar, and have for some time now.
I walk up to a computer. It's not doing anything. I pull the cord out of the wall. Linux fsck's when it restarts. Windows does a chkdisk. If I wasn't doing anything at the time why is this necessary? What wasn't written to the disk when the last application quit running? I should be able to turn the box on, reload the OS into RAM and go.
Umm... if a catastrophic power failure occurs with a non-journalled filesystem, the OS has no way of telling if, prior to the failure, there was blocks that were only partially written to disk. As such, on such filesystems, an fsck is necessary (well, assuming you want to be safe).
Nonetheless, if you use a modern OS you can make use of a journalled filesystem (in Linux, ext3 (default on most modern distros), XFS, JFS, ReiserFS), in which case an fsck isn't necessary at all. Ever. But, of course, you didn't look into that, either, did you?
This is just plain wrong. With KDE and GNOME, you can just double click on the CD-ROM icon and, AFAIK, it mounts the drive automatically. And I'm pretty sure Fedora does CD-ROM automounting out of the box without any user intervention whatsoever.
The font support in X is awful. I can't resize the text of web pages in Linux Mozilla. I've got poor eyesight and I sometimes really need that.
Funny. I just did a ctrl-+ and a ctrl-- in Firefox, and the font increased and then decreased in size. In terms of font quality, any modern distro supports TrueType fonts, and it's fairly easy to acquire a decent set of TrueType fonts (assuming your distro doesn't install them automatically).
The system administration is even more of a mess than windows in most of the linux systems I've tried (gentoo, redhat, slackware, mandrake).
Well, I have little to say, here. I find admin easy, but I'm a command-line guy. Fedora seems to do a decent job with it's GUI admin tools, but, again, it really depends on how you define "a mess".
My other big beef isn't present only on Linux though. Having writes to the hard disk cached and possibly lost when power fails is bad bad bad! I won't buy a vcr that forgets all the settings when the power fails.
Ooookay. I will guarantee you, you've *never* used an OS that *doesn't* cache writes to disk. Linux does it. So does Windows. Frankly, I don't even know where you get this one from...
Now, you can minimize the amount of data loss if you use a journalled filesystem (most modern distros use ext3 or something similar by default). But if data hasn't been commited to disk, it will get lost. That is the price you pay for decent performance.
How is this a troll? I honestly don't care. I use Linux at home. Does it matter to me if my entire block uses Linux? No. Does it matter to me if my mother uses Linux? No. I. Don't. Care. If people can use Linux to solve their problems, great. Fantastic. If Windows is a better tool for others, good for them. Why should I give a damn what operating system they use? I don't care if my neighbour uses Linux any more than I care if they prefer Ford over Chevy, or they prefer teflon cookware over stainless steel.
Frankly, I want to know why people have this deluded idea that Linux must be everything to everyone. Maybe Linux will never be newbie-friendly... big deal. If they really don't want to use MS, they can buy a Mac and use OS X.
Yeah! And while we're at it, we should stop building all other telescopes, including the JWST. Hey, we should also stop development of all supercolliders, too. And we should shut down all those neutrino observatories... what are we learning from them? And what about that gravitational wave observatory? Not to mention all those radio telescopes that are sucking up our tax dollars!
Telescopes, just like all those other instruments, serve as a gateway to understanding the universe. Supercolliders allow us to understand the world of the incredibly small. Telescopes allow us to understand the world of the unimaginablely large. All of them help us to further are knowledge about the world around us. The Hubble is a key instrument in this search for knowledge and one which does not have an adequate replacement (and, no, the JWST is not a Hubble-equivalent instrument). Allowing the Hubble to vaporize in the atmosphere would effectively shut down an incredibly source of information about our universe. Moreover, The Hubble is, and will continue to be, our only servicable orbiting astronomy platform... this is, IMHO, a rather valuable resource which shouldn't just be thrown away (just consider all the upgrades that have been done to Hubble, and which were planned for the next service mission).
Try installing the hotplugging stuff and configure it to set the proper permissions on your scanner device. Or, alternatively (this is far less secure, but if you're behind a firewall, it's probably not a big deal), set up saned and have it run as root, then access the scanner through saned instead.
Are you using devfs? Did you try to migrate to udev (since devfs is deprecated)? Did you try to manually create those device entries and just use them, so you can at least make sure the device drivers work?
As for/sys, you compiled sysfs into the kernel, right? If so, it should be automatically mounted (well, at least, it is on my box). You also need the following fstab entry, in order to mount usbfs:
Or might not. Statistically, the case is awfully weak. In Australia, England, and every state in the U.S., there's been a decided tendency for murder rates to increase after gun control laws are made more strict.
Funny, this this table (which contains data for quite a number of countries around the world) tells a much different (and complicated) story. Which just goes to show that the issue is not so nearly cut and dried as you seem to think.
As I mentioned, read up on the Warsaw Resistance. The Jews in Warsaw did exactly that. Starting with a couple dozen firearms, they held off the German army for a month.
In the end, the Germans gave up and burned the city.
First of all, I conceed that people can, for a small time, defend themselves against the government, assuming the circumstances are right. However, in the end, the government will win. Why? Resources, plain and simple.
Now, about burning down Warsaw, it appears you may be overstating things. According to this, they simply burned down the houses in the Warsaw Ghetto, not the entire city... something I'm sure the Nazis were willing to do to any Jewish ghetto, if necessary.
In the same way, guns in civilian hands are an inoculation against murderous government.
Hardly. Do you really think the Jews could have defended themselves against the Nazis, who had machine guns, amongst other things? Please... an armed populace does not stop the government from doing as they please... it just makes the job slightly more difficult. And only just slightly.
One factor counts because it's racist, another doesn't because it's not?
That's not what I said. You asked me if I'd support arm bands for Jews. I said no because it's racist. I should have also mentioned that no good can come from such an action, so of course I would oppose it.
Gun control laws, OTOH, can do a great deal of good... last I checked, there were a *lot* of firearm-related fatalities in the US which might be prevented with stricter gun control laws.
You're assuming that racism is the only important root of genocide, ignoring evidence to the contrary.
Bah. You're putting words in my mouth. I never made any connection (exclusive or otherwise) between racism and genocide. I simply said arm bands for Jews is a clearly racist idea and one which can never be justified.
You gotta be trolling me on the rocket thing. Some ideas are good, some are bad, and the source of the ideas is not the only determining factor.
So then gun control laws cannot be evil simply because the Nazi regime employed them, correct? The problem is, that's what the JPFO wants you to believe. They use the Nazi connection and say "See! The Nazis did it, so it's bad!". But that's clearly a false connection, based on what you just said. And before you say that the gun control laws were (supposedly) used to suppress Jews (making them bad), keep in mind, rockets were used to kill many a Londoner, as well... the point is that if an idea/concept/technology is used for evil, that doesn't mean it can't do good, either. Arm bands for Jews is clearly something which can never do any good... gun control, OTOH, is not the same at all.
But it also places a lot more of the responsibility for security on the administrator's head,
But it also means that, at any given time, you can know *exactly* what's running on your machine, because nothing is hidden from you. Can you say the same for a more closed system like Windows?
Most hacks for Windows aren't widely exploited until after a patch is released anyway,
Sorry, but this is bullshit. First, if a hack is available in the wild, do you really think *you'll* be the first person to know about it? As the person mentioned in this article points out, black hats often have exploits weeks or months before patches are available.
whereas on Linux it's often in reverse
And why no earth would Linux be so special? Or, perhaps it's Windows that supposedly "special". No, sorry, but the two situations are the same, no matter what MS would have you believe. Security fixes are almost always reactive, whether you like it or not.
Linux just better allows you to micromanage things than Windows, which can either be a good or a bad thing depending on the skill of the admin.
Well, duh. But if you have an idiot admin, security is probably the least of your worries.
Now, personally, I'd rather have an open, easily auditable system that has reasonable defaults but allows me to tweak things if necessary. Windows provides only the second of those three features (and even that's debateable... open RPC ports, anyone?)... a decent Linux distribution can provide all three. Now, sure, Linux can provide plenty of rope to hang ones-self with, but I'd rather have my fate in my own hands than to trust a company who thinks they know what's best for me.
To some degree, this is true. But the UV spectrum is *very* interesting, as it can be used for, amongst other things, detecting organic compounds in distant objects. Well, guess what, the JWST doesn't cover UV, either, and neither does any other telescope currently available, since the UV is only reachable from space.
The fact is, the Hubble and JWST instruments are *complementary*. The Hubble can still do a lot of valuable science, and shutting it down for supposed budgetary reasons is just plain silly, IMHO.
Suppose Congress passed a law saying all Jews must wear armbands. Would you invoke Godwin if I said the Nazis did that? Would you say I'm using foolish emotional arguments?
No, because that's clearly an example of racial discrimination. Now please take your straw man and go home.
The JPFO has books full of statistics. One of them examines the six biggest genocides of the 20th century. Every one of them was preceded by disarmament of the victims.
Don't be an idiot. Genocides are often preceeded by disarmament (obviously... if you're gonna mass murder people, it's easier if they don't have guns). That doesn't mean that disarmament automatically leads to genocide. It's called Modus Ponens... read up on it.
The JPFO has but one end, and that's to make damn sure that the Holocaust never happens again.
And gun control laws will automatically lead to a second holocaust? Gotcha.
Using Nazi engineering is quite different from using Nazi law. By your argument, since we use rockets, we would be hypocrites if we had a problem with armbands.
Absolutely. Presumably, you support NASA, but don't support gun control. Therefore, I call you a hypocrite, since both are (supposedly) rooted in Naziism. Similarly, if you supported arm bands for Jews, but not gun control, I would also call you a hypocrite. How is this confusing?
No. It invokes Naziism and the terrible atrocities that occured in it's name in order to convince people that gun control is wrong. So, instead of providing solid, logical arguments why gun control is inappropriate (you know, statistics and other *evidence*), it does worse and attempts to use an emotional argument: "the Nazi's did it, and Nazi's killed Jews, therefore gun control killed Jews!".
Sorry, but I give no credit to an organization who's willing to exploit the deaths of millions of Jews in order to further their own ends. It's immoral, and I will never listen to "arguments" put forth by such an organization. Frankly, the JFPO appears to be nothing more than a propaganda machine of the worst kind.
Of course, it's nice of you to completely ignore my reference to the US rocketry program. This is another example of the US taking ideas from the Nazi regime and using it. But that's not bad, is it? Otherwise, we wouldn't have your beloved NASA. But, of course, rockets are good, and gun control is *baaad* (and, of course, double standards are good, too).
Well, clearly you don't understand Godwin's Law, which is:
"As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one." (from The Jargon Dictionary)
The key text being "a comparison *involving* Nazis or Hitler". And that's exactly what the previous poster did. Well, indirectly... the grandparent's link all but calls gun control supporters Nazis. Hell, they've got a lovely picture of Jews in a prison camp, and then attempt to link gun control with the death of Jews! How is this *not* an example of Godwin's Law in action?
Oh, and BTW, early US rocket designs have elements directly lifted from Nazi rockets! The same rockets used to bomb London! Think of it!
Slashdot Mirror
Somehow, I doubt it. Just a little perspective. Based on the current position of Earth and Mars:
Distance from Earth to the closest star in Orion (HD 30652): 26.176 lightyears
Distance from Earth to Mars: 0.0000278306 lightyears.
So, the distance from Earth or Mars is 0.00010632% the distance from Earth to 30652.
Basically, we're so damned far from Orion that, no matter where you were in the *solar system*, it would probably look the same.
Incidentally, if you want to check this out for yourself (ie, look at the constellations from orbit around Mars), and you have a hardware-accelerated 3D card, I would highly recommend trying out Celestia, a very impressive space simulator
But, as I've mentioned in another post, this Nintendo patent doesn't cover something like PocketNES. It does cover, say, GBonGBA, or the Game Gear portions of DrSMS. But it doesn't apply to console-on-GBA emulators, as the patent only covers emulating a "handheld video game platform". So, I'm thinking there's gotta be more to this... I just can't figure out what it is...
Well, given that this patent covers "emulating a handheld video game platform" on a "low-capability platform", which doesn't apply to PocketNES or anything like it (since the NES wasn't a handheld video game platform), I'm thinking Nintendo has other motivations...
You're an idiot. From "make menuconfig":
/dev file system support (OBSOLETE)
[ ]
Moron.
I don't think there's really an idealogical difference between the (old Tories) and the Liberals, at least fiscally.
:)
Well, I live in Alberta, so I'd have to disagree a bit.:) Of course, Klein is probably one of the most fiscally conservative government leaders in all of Canada, so my view of the Conservative Party might be a bit coloured.
What would happen if an American party seriously hinted at implementing public health-care?
Actually Clinton (both of them) hinted at the idea for a while there, as you might recall. It went over like a lead balloon, as you'd probably expect.
The Reform-Tory merger will change things, but overall I hope that the old guard take control over the (new) Conservative party so that there's a reasonable alternative to Liberal east of Manitoba.
Well, we'll see. The way things are going, Harper very well may be the new leader. And if that's the case, it might be hard for the new party to shed the image of being just a reformed Reform Party, which would significantly reduce their chances in the East. But, we shall see... I'm left-leaning, personally, but a little more competition at the Federal level can only be a good thing for democracy in Canada.
Of course it had something to do with it. But this investigation will deal with the Canadian subsidiary, thus puts this battle squarely in Canadian territory where the FTC has absolutely no power.
An American company with a Canadian subsidiary. Who do you think the Canadian government dealth with? Do you understand business at *all*?
Oh, and one other thing. You may love your NDP party, but the people in BC probably don't. And the people of Saskatchewan weren't all that please with them either, as was evident in the last election. So, please, quite twisting facts. All the parties have their problems. There is no magic bullet. Although, a minority government might be *a* solution...
Oh please. The Liberal's in Canada are considerably more left than the Republicans in the US. Of course, the Conservative Party here in Canada is also considerably more left than the Republicans in the US. This probably has something to do with less religious fundamentalism in this country.
The real difference between the Liberal's and the Conservatives in Canada is their fiscal, rather than social policies. Socially, they're very close (though, the conservatives are, unsuprisingly, slightly more socially conservative (see same-sex marriage, marijuana laws, etc)). Fiscally, they are comparable to the Dems/Reps in the US, except the Conservatives in Canada want to cut spending along with taxes, rather than just the latter.
As for the rest of it, well, that remains to be seen. There was plenty of corruption in the previous Liberal governments. Will that continue? I don't know. Would it be better with an NDP or Conservative government? I'm not so sure...
Huh? You have hard disks in your computer that
/home? Or my USB camera to /camera. How can the system know these things unless I *tell* it? Oh, wait, you're used to Windows where the OS does things *to* you, rather than *for* you.
... money" to do it. It's free. Unlike, say, Windows XP.
aren't accessable when you boot? If I put a
storage device in my computer it's because I
want access to it. That's why I put it in.
Having it mounted automatically
for me is a logical time saver. It's bad
design to ask a user to confirm they want
the standard expected behaviour.
Well, where should it be mounted, then? What if I want to mount the second partition of may hard drive to
As for the rest of your post, I'm not even going to bother to respond, since every one of your complaints is incredibly dated. Honestly, maybe you should try a *recent* version of <insert Linux distro here>, rather than basing your impressions on something that's, what, a least 5 years old, if not more. Seriously, Mozilla 0.9.7?? Good lord!
Incidentally, if you want to try out Linux again, you don't need to "waste
Perhaps they figured it
out in 'Fedora'.
They did. Although, I find it quite annoying. If I have a hard disk in my machine, I don't expect it to be automatically mounted. The same goes with any other storage device (eg, USB mass storage, floppies, etc). Why should CD's behave differently?
Last time I checked Mozilla didn't do that.
How hard did you look? Hell, *when* did you look? As of Mozilla version 1.4.1, which isn't exactly new, this feature has been present. I'm pretty sure it was in there even before that, although I'm not going to take the time to confirm.
The
question seems to me to be why is a
useful feature like that not present
when it's been in the windows version of
the same software for more than a year?
It is present. You appear to have missed it somehow. Perhaps you should look harder next time.
All the system admin tasks in one place.
In some sort of consistant organization.
Well, on this Fedora box that I have in front of me, if I open the panel menu at the bottom of the screen and select "System Settings", I'm presented a menu with options to configure pretty much everything a naive user would need to configure. Is this not easy enough for you? And in my experience, most other distros have something similar, and have for some time now.
I walk up to a computer. It's not doing anything.
I pull the cord out of the wall. Linux fsck's
when it restarts. Windows does a chkdisk. If I
wasn't doing anything at the time why is this
necessary? What wasn't written to the disk when
the last application quit running? I should be
able to turn the box on, reload the OS into RAM
and go.
Umm... if a catastrophic power failure occurs with a non-journalled filesystem, the OS has no way of telling if, prior to the failure, there was blocks that were only partially written to disk. As such, on such filesystems, an fsck is necessary (well, assuming you want to be safe).
Nonetheless, if you use a modern OS you can make use of a journalled filesystem (in Linux, ext3 (default on most modern distros), XFS, JFS, ReiserFS), in which case an fsck isn't necessary at all. Ever. But, of course, you didn't look into that, either, did you?
There's a discussion about it here.
What an odd set of complaints:
You have to mount and uncount cd's. That's awful.
This is just plain wrong. With KDE and GNOME, you can just double click on the CD-ROM icon and, AFAIK, it mounts the drive automatically. And I'm pretty sure Fedora does CD-ROM automounting out of the box without any user intervention whatsoever.
The font support in X is awful. I can't resize
the text of web pages in Linux Mozilla. I've
got poor eyesight and I sometimes really need
that.
Funny. I just did a ctrl-+ and a ctrl-- in Firefox, and the font increased and then decreased in size. In terms of font quality, any modern distro supports TrueType fonts, and it's fairly easy to acquire a decent set of TrueType fonts (assuming your distro doesn't install them automatically).
The system administration is even more of a mess
than windows in most of the linux systems I've
tried (gentoo, redhat, slackware, mandrake).
Well, I have little to say, here. I find admin easy, but I'm a command-line guy. Fedora seems to do a decent job with it's GUI admin tools, but, again, it really depends on how you define "a mess".
My other big beef isn't present only on Linux
though. Having writes to the hard disk cached
and possibly lost when power fails is bad
bad bad! I won't buy a vcr that forgets all
the settings when the power fails.
Ooookay. I will guarantee you, you've *never* used an OS that *doesn't* cache writes to disk. Linux does it. So does Windows. Frankly, I don't even know where you get this one from...
Now, you can minimize the amount of data loss if you use a journalled filesystem (most modern distros use ext3 or something similar by default). But if data hasn't been commited to disk, it will get lost. That is the price you pay for decent performance.
How is this a troll? I honestly don't care. I use Linux at home. Does it matter to me if my entire block uses Linux? No. Does it matter to me if my mother uses Linux? No. I. Don't. Care. If people can use Linux to solve their problems, great. Fantastic. If Windows is a better tool for others, good for them. Why should I give a damn what operating system they use? I don't care if my neighbour uses Linux any more than I care if they prefer Ford over Chevy, or they prefer teflon cookware over stainless steel.
Frankly, I want to know why people have this deluded idea that Linux must be everything to everyone. Maybe Linux will never be newbie-friendly... big deal. If they really don't want to use MS, they can buy a Mac and use OS X.
Yeah! And while we're at it, we should stop building all other telescopes, including the JWST. Hey, we should also stop development of all supercolliders, too. And we should shut down all those neutrino observatories... what are we learning from them? And what about that gravitational wave observatory? Not to mention all those radio telescopes that are sucking up our tax dollars!
Telescopes, just like all those other instruments, serve as a gateway to understanding the universe. Supercolliders allow us to understand the world of the incredibly small. Telescopes allow us to understand the world of the unimaginablely large. All of them help us to further are knowledge about the world around us. The Hubble is a key instrument in this search for knowledge and one which does not have an adequate replacement (and, no, the JWST is not a Hubble-equivalent instrument). Allowing the Hubble to vaporize in the atmosphere would effectively shut down an incredibly source of information about our universe. Moreover, The Hubble is, and will continue to be, our only servicable orbiting astronomy platform... this is, IMHO, a rather valuable resource which shouldn't just be thrown away (just consider all the upgrades that have been done to Hubble, and which were planned for the next service mission).
Good for them. Why do I care?
Try installing the hotplugging stuff and configure it to set the proper permissions on your scanner device. Or, alternatively (this is far less secure, but if you're behind a firewall, it's probably not a big deal), set up saned and have it run as root, then access the scanner through saned instead.
Are you using devfs? Did you try to migrate to udev (since devfs is deprecated)? Did you try to manually create those device entries and just use them, so you can at least make sure the device drivers work?
/sys, you compiled sysfs into the kernel, right? If so, it should be automatically mounted (well, at least, it is on my box). You also need the following fstab entry, in order to mount usbfs:
/sys/bus/usb usbfs defaults 0 0
As for
none
Or might not. Statistically, the case is awfully weak. In Australia, England, and every state in the U.S., there's been a decided tendency for murder rates to increase after gun control laws are made more strict.
Funny, this this table (which contains data for quite a number of countries around the world) tells a much different (and complicated) story. Which just goes to show that the issue is not so nearly cut and dried as you seem to think.
As I mentioned, read up on the Warsaw Resistance. The Jews in Warsaw did exactly that. Starting with a couple dozen firearms, they held off the German army for a month.
In the end, the Germans gave up and burned the city.
First of all, I conceed that people can, for a small time, defend themselves against the government, assuming the circumstances are right. However, in the end, the government will win. Why? Resources, plain and simple.
Now, about burning down Warsaw, it appears you may be overstating things. According to this, they simply burned down the houses in the Warsaw Ghetto, not the entire city... something I'm sure the Nazis were willing to do to any Jewish ghetto, if necessary.
In the same way, guns in civilian hands are an inoculation against murderous government.
Hardly. Do you really think the Jews could have defended themselves against the Nazis, who had machine guns, amongst other things? Please... an armed populace does not stop the government from doing as they please... it just makes the job slightly more difficult. And only just slightly.
One factor counts because it's racist, another doesn't because it's not?
That's not what I said. You asked me if I'd support arm bands for Jews. I said no because it's racist. I should have also mentioned that no good can come from such an action, so of course I would oppose it.
Gun control laws, OTOH, can do a great deal of good... last I checked, there were a *lot* of firearm-related fatalities in the US which might be prevented with stricter gun control laws.
You're assuming that racism is the only important root of genocide, ignoring evidence to the contrary.
Bah. You're putting words in my mouth. I never made any connection (exclusive or otherwise) between racism and genocide. I simply said arm bands for Jews is a clearly racist idea and one which can never be justified.
You gotta be trolling me on the rocket thing. Some ideas are good, some are bad, and the source of the ideas is not the only determining factor.
So then gun control laws cannot be evil simply because the Nazi regime employed them, correct? The problem is, that's what the JPFO wants you to believe. They use the Nazi connection and say "See! The Nazis did it, so it's bad!". But that's clearly a false connection, based on what you just said. And before you say that the gun control laws were (supposedly) used to suppress Jews (making them bad), keep in mind, rockets were used to kill many a Londoner, as well... the point is that if an idea/concept/technology is used for evil, that doesn't mean it can't do good, either. Arm bands for Jews is clearly something which can never do any good... gun control, OTOH, is not the same at all.
But it also places a lot more of the responsibility for security on the administrator's head,
But it also means that, at any given time, you can know *exactly* what's running on your machine, because nothing is hidden from you. Can you say the same for a more closed system like Windows?
Most hacks for Windows aren't widely exploited until after a patch is released anyway,
Sorry, but this is bullshit. First, if a hack is available in the wild, do you really think *you'll* be the first person to know about it? As the person mentioned in this article points out, black hats often have exploits weeks or months before patches are available.
whereas on Linux it's often in reverse
And why no earth would Linux be so special? Or, perhaps it's Windows that supposedly "special". No, sorry, but the two situations are the same, no matter what MS would have you believe. Security fixes are almost always reactive, whether you like it or not.
Linux just better allows you to micromanage things than Windows, which can either be a good or a bad thing depending on the skill of the admin.
Well, duh. But if you have an idiot admin, security is probably the least of your worries.
Now, personally, I'd rather have an open, easily auditable system that has reasonable defaults but allows me to tweak things if necessary. Windows provides only the second of those three features (and even that's debateable... open RPC ports, anyone?)... a decent Linux distribution can provide all three. Now, sure, Linux can provide plenty of rope to hang ones-self with, but I'd rather have my fate in my own hands than to trust a company who thinks they know what's best for me.
Because the optical is boring.
To some degree, this is true. But the UV spectrum is *very* interesting, as it can be used for, amongst other things, detecting organic compounds in distant objects. Well, guess what, the JWST doesn't cover UV, either, and neither does any other telescope currently available, since the UV is only reachable from space.
The fact is, the Hubble and JWST instruments are *complementary*. The Hubble can still do a lot of valuable science, and shutting it down for supposed budgetary reasons is just plain silly, IMHO.
Suppose Congress passed a law saying all Jews must wear armbands. Would you invoke Godwin if I said the Nazis did that? Would you say I'm using foolish emotional arguments?
No, because that's clearly an example of racial discrimination. Now please take your straw man and go home.
The JPFO has books full of statistics. One of them examines the six biggest genocides of the 20th century. Every one of them was preceded by disarmament of the victims.
Don't be an idiot. Genocides are often preceeded by disarmament (obviously... if you're gonna mass murder people, it's easier if they don't have guns). That doesn't mean that disarmament automatically leads to genocide. It's called Modus Ponens... read up on it.
The JPFO has but one end, and that's to make damn sure that the Holocaust never happens again.
And gun control laws will automatically lead to a second holocaust? Gotcha.
Using Nazi engineering is quite different from using Nazi law. By your argument, since we use rockets, we would be hypocrites if we had a problem with armbands.
Absolutely. Presumably, you support NASA, but don't support gun control. Therefore, I call you a hypocrite, since both are (supposedly) rooted in Naziism. Similarly, if you supported arm bands for Jews, but not gun control, I would also call you a hypocrite. How is this confusing?
No. It invokes Naziism and the terrible atrocities that occured in it's name in order to convince people that gun control is wrong. So, instead of providing solid, logical arguments why gun control is inappropriate (you know, statistics and other *evidence*), it does worse and attempts to use an emotional argument: "the Nazi's did it, and Nazi's killed Jews, therefore gun control killed Jews!".
Sorry, but I give no credit to an organization who's willing to exploit the deaths of millions of Jews in order to further their own ends. It's immoral, and I will never listen to "arguments" put forth by such an organization. Frankly, the JFPO appears to be nothing more than a propaganda machine of the worst kind.
Of course, it's nice of you to completely ignore my reference to the US rocketry program. This is another example of the US taking ideas from the Nazi regime and using it. But that's not bad, is it? Otherwise, we wouldn't have your beloved NASA. But, of course, rockets are good, and gun control is *baaad* (and, of course, double standards are good, too).
Well, clearly you don't understand Godwin's Law, which is:
"As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one." (from The Jargon Dictionary)
The key text being "a comparison *involving* Nazis or Hitler". And that's exactly what the previous poster did. Well, indirectly... the grandparent's link all but calls gun control supporters Nazis. Hell, they've got a lovely picture of Jews in a prison camp, and then attempt to link gun control with the death of Jews! How is this *not* an example of Godwin's Law in action?
Oh, and BTW, early US rocket designs have elements directly lifted from Nazi rockets! The same rockets used to bomb London! Think of it!