I was really surprised to see that Software Development was the second most popular primary application for Linux laptops.
No kidding. I write a little code on my laptop while traveling, but for day-to-day work I want a beefy workstation with multiple, large monitors, and I want a better keyboard than I've ever found on a laptop, and a good trackball. My workstation is has two 24" monitors and one 30" monitor (and I'm looking to upgrade that 30" to a 40" 4K display) and has a Kinesis Advantage Pro keyboard (with foot pedals!) and a Kensington Expert trackball (which I'm not entirely happy with -- recommendations welcome!).
I can work through a porthole, but why would I want to?
I know this is totally off topic. But it is so fucking depressing that you feel that you need to carry a gun or a knife to be safe.
You missed it; they feel the need to carry a gun or knife to still feel/be unsafe.
I feel exactly the same degree of safety with or without a weapon. If anything, carrying a deadly weapon makes me more cautious, which could be translated as feeling less safe. But feelings have nothing to do with why I carry.
I genuinely expect to go my entire life, in the country I live, to neither go through, or knowing anyone who goes through an encounter where their life or those of people around them are at risk from an individuals actions.
I expect that I'll carry a gun my entire life and never have occasion to draw it.
However, I do know people who have been at risk. I know women who have been raped, and have a niece who was carjacked at knifepoint. Truthfully all of the people I know personally who have been subject to severe personal violence or risk of severe personal violence are women, which is why I like to see women in my classes and often don't charge them for the course, but things do happen to men, too. This is true in your country as well, even if it is a less violent place than the US.
Giving them your meds is a good idea. If that doesn't work, give them your money, your phone, your shoes, whatever. Unless what they want is to hurt you, don't give them a fight. Of course, if they do want to hurt you, hurt them first and hurt them harder, faster and meaner.
I know this is totally off topic. But it is so fucking depressing that you feel that you need to carry a gun or a knife to be safe.
I don't. I don't carry weapons to feel safe, and I feel perfectly safe when I'm not carrying.
I carry because I believe that society as a whole is safer if there are rational, calm, law-abiding, trained and armed people around at all times. One way to achieve this would be to massively increase the police presence... but that is not only very expensive but has all sorts of negative consequences as those police try to do things to justify their pay. A better approach is licensing of law-abiding civilians. That's why I carry, and why I use my free time to train and certify other people to carry.
Ubuntu and Mint are Debian based, so the Debian total is 65%. Manjaro is Arch-based, so Arch is 28.7%. I also tend to lump RPM-based distros together, Fedora + SUSE + RedHat is at 22.1%.
Personally, I started with Red Hat (5.0 IIRC, and note this is not Red Hat Enterprise Linux, which started a new number sequence), obtained as a boxed set on CDs purchased at Barnes & Noble. It wasn't long before I gave Debian a try, starting with 2.0 (Hamm), and I was hooked. Within a couple of years I had stopped using Windows completely, so Windows 2000 was the last version I used, and that only briefly. For many years I ran Debian unstable, then I backed off to running testing, since it was less fiddly, not that unstable is bad, really. It's quite solid; the name refers to the changing nature of the contents, not to the reliability of the system. Along the way I tinkered with Gentoo, Slack and a few others, but always came back to Debian.
These days I just use my work machines which run a customized version of Ubuntu (desktop) and OS X (laptop). If I did have a personally-owned laptop, it would probably be a MacBook running Debian testing. Though I'd probably give Arch a try. I like the rolling release model and Debian testing undergoes occasional lockdowns as the project gets close to a release. If Arch is less fiddly than Debian unstable, I might like it better.
Do you think the president could have brought pressure on him to be fired if he refused?
He could have asked the board, but it would still just be a request. Unless, as I said, the bailout were conditional upon the resignation. But it explicitly was not.
You only need to use electronic payments, such as a credit card, not necessarily online. Many thefts used compromised readers during a regular in person transaction, though newer cards make this less likely. Ultimately your retailer will typically store your payment information in a database, along with other personally identifying information. This is even more likely with over the phone purchases. Many companies store it in plain text while few properly hash/encrypt it.
The above isn't actually all that true; PCI requirements demand encryption at rest (encryption, not hashing, there's no point in hashing a credit card number). But let's assume that it's true.
Meh. I don't care.
By federal law, my liability for any fraud is limited to $50. In practice, no credit card issuer I've ever met in the US (and I used to do security consulting for credit card issuers, so I've met a lot of them) charges cardholders a penny. If you claim that a transaction is fraudulent, and they can't prove it wasn't, you won't pay a penny. If they're pretty sure you're the fraudster, they'll just cancel your card, and refuse to do business with you any more.
Credit card payment is the safest form of payment, online or in meatspace. Cash is the least safe form of payment.
Note that I'm talking about safety, not privacy. That's a separate issue, and on the privacy axis cash is king and credit cards are awful (though personal checks are significantly worse, assuming you can find someone still willing to accept one).
Note also that debit card transactions (when processed through the debit networks, not as credit cards) do not provide the same protections that credit cards do. Many banks do handle fraud similarly, but you need to get your bank's policy to know. With credit cards, the $50 liability limit is guaranteed by law.
I'll put up a fight before I hand over anything, assuming anyone wants to try me.
I mean this in the kindest possible way, but your'e a damned fool.
I don't care how big you are, or that you have a knife (I carry a gun, myself), the risks involved in getting into a fight are far greater than the value of a few hundred bucks. If you lose the fight, it may be worth your life. Carrying a deadly weapon actually increases that risk in some ways. (Aside: If you carry a lethal weapon, I recommend carrying a less lethal weapon as well, such as OC spray; this is to provide you with an option that allows you to maintain some distance in the event the situation doesn't justify deadly force. You don't want to get into a wrestling mach while carrying a deadly weapon.)
But even if you win the fight, it may still cost you your life, not because you die but because you end up having to defend your actions in court, creating an incredibly stressful situation for yourself, likely destroying your savings, and possibly landing you in prison. Whether your use of deadly force to defend yourself is legal depends on a host of factors, some of them subtle and hard to judge in the heat of the moment, and that's assuming that the actual facts are provable and not something else entirely.
There's also a psychological risk. Killing someone, even if fully justified, seriously messes some people up. Unless you've killed someone before, you do not -- and cannot -- know how it will affect you.
I carry a gun. I'm a concealed weapons permit instructor, so I teach and certify other people to carry guns. I strongly believe in the importance and value of being armed. But if handing over some cash and my cell phone will end the encounter peacefully, I'll hand it over in a heartbeat. A few hundred bucks isn't worth my life. For that matter, it's not worth the life of the mugger, even if the fool is asking for it.
The only way my gun is coming out of concealment is if I have a real belief that my life, or the life of someone else, is at serious risk if I do not. I practice, and teach, a "balance of fears" decision making process, because in a potentially-violent encounter there isn't time to determine the details of justification of force. Instead, I assume that if I draw my gun (or knife; I usually have one of those, too), I will go to prison for it. So, I will only introduce deadly force if I believe that whatever will happen if I don't is worse than going to prison. This makes it fairly certain that I will only use deadly force when it is very easy to justify... and if through a quirk of the situation or the system I end up going to prison for it, well, I believed based on what I knew at the time that that was the better choice.
Clearly, I'm not willing to go to prison over a few hundred dollars, so there's no way I'm using deadly force if I'm pretty certain that just handing over the cash will end it.
Obama didn't fire Wagoneer, he asked him to resign and Wagoneer agreed.
That's probably the dumbest sentence you've written all week. At the CxO level, no one gets fired.......they are asked to resign. It's the same thing.
It's the same thing when the board asks, because the board could fire the CEO if the request were refused. But the president has no authority to fire employees of private companies, so it truly was just a request.
FYI: You're living in a reality distortion field. You should turn that off.
Obama didn't fire Wagoneer, he asked him to resign and Wagoneer agreed. And the motivation for the request was GM's request for a multi-billion dollar bailout; the resignation wasn't a condition of receiving the bailout, but IMO it would have been perfectly reasonable if it were. If a CEO has to beg the government to save his company, he's clearly failed.
What was your dipshit Obama suckup point again?
Sigh. This is the sad state of what passes for political discussion in the US. One can't state facts that show one side in a bad light without being accused of being partisan for the other side. I didn't care for Obama and I'm glad he's not the the White House any more. That said, I'd gladly trade Trump for just about anybody, Obama included.
I'm always interested in the opinions of folks if any article, regardless of the media source, replaced Trump with Obama in the article.
[John]
I'm no fan of Obama, but I don't think he ever did anything remotely similar to this, (allegedly) threatening to kill a merger unless a news network stops criticizing him. The most he ever did was threaten to exclude Fox from the press pool at an event (and then backed down).
They normally don't sue for violations of the GPL for non-GNU software
They don't sue for any software for which they do not own the copyright, because they would not have standing in court and the case would never make it to court.
The FSF does own some contributions in Linux, and has sued over it. Cisco, for one.
In that case, I find it very surprising that the FSF has not sued.
Sue for what? There is nothing that says that the modifications are released under GPL.
As long as the company is willing to provide the original source code without their modifications they are in the clear.
They don't even need to publish it on a homepage, they could send it to you on a CD and charge you for the CD, stamps, and work spent on burning the CD.
You need to re-read the GPL. Or a summary of it. Or any discussion of it. Or, really, anything at all about it.
What does "wet" mean, exactly? How do we sense wetness? What is a reasonable way to measure wetness? How do different dissolved substances affect the wetness? There are very interesting studies about all of these.
- Summer is warm.
But how warm, and where is it getting warmer and where is it getting cooler, and by how much? This is an area of intensive study.
- Sky is blue
There used to be good questions about why it's blue, but I think those are answered. OTOH, I haven't seen any studies about sky blueness, so this example fails in the other direction; it's well understood so no one studies it.
Brought to you by Captain Obvious Science & Research Institute
You misspelled "Shallow and Incurious Thinking".
Lots of studies of apparently-obvious things are much deeper and more sophisticated than the headlines that filter through reporters' shallow understanding appear. In many cases, studies address well-known phenomena in order to work out detailed models and measurements of the phenomena. In a few cases, studies are done to find out if widespread, "common sense" beliefs are actually true. Sometimes they're not and those are very interesting and useful results, which can only be obtained by studying the "obvious".
That's the name I have for them. I still wonder if they're slowly pecking out "Brains!" while they stagger along eyes down peering at their phone while they walk out in front of traffic...
I learned to do this long before I ever got a phone. As a kid in the late 70s and early to mid 80s I read a lot of books while walking, especially to and from school.
That's the name I have for them. I still wonder if they're slowly pecking out "Brains!" while they stagger along eyes down peering at their phone while they walk out in front of traffic...
I learned to do this long before I ever got a phone. As a kid in the late 70s and early to mid 80s I read a lot of books while walking, especially to and from school.
In other words, there are additions and/or modifications to the source code used to generate the kernel that are not made public. Meaning that you cannot yourself generate a functional kernel for the unit using the standard open-source kernel processes. You therefore cannot customize the kernel for your special needs and you don't really have any way to know what possible nefarious activities it's up to.
In that case, I find it very surprising that the FSF has not sued. They normally don't sue for violations of the GPL for non-GNU software, but they make an exception for Linux.
While this is funny, chances are that most violently anti-pedos are indeed closet-pedos.
Some, anyway. "Most" is a pretty strong claim. In this case, I'm sure many violent anti-pedos are anti because they were abused as children and want to make sure it never happens again (and some of them may have pedophilic tendencies as a result of their abuse, but they're not "closet pedos" if they never act on those tendencies).
Slashdot Mirror
Wow. So tell me - did he steal your girlfriend, or was it he kicked your dog?
Other way around. I stole his dog and kicked his girlfriend. I think. It's kind of hard to tell them apart.
I was really surprised to see that Software Development was the second most popular primary application for Linux laptops.
No kidding. I write a little code on my laptop while traveling, but for day-to-day work I want a beefy workstation with multiple, large monitors, and I want a better keyboard than I've ever found on a laptop, and a good trackball. My workstation is has two 24" monitors and one 30" monitor (and I'm looking to upgrade that 30" to a 40" 4K display) and has a Kinesis Advantage Pro keyboard (with foot pedals!) and a Kensington Expert trackball (which I'm not entirely happy with -- recommendations welcome!).
I can work through a porthole, but why would I want to?
I know this is totally off topic. But it is so fucking depressing that you feel that you need to carry a gun or a knife to be safe.
You missed it; they feel the need to carry a gun or knife to still feel/be unsafe.
I feel exactly the same degree of safety with or without a weapon. If anything, carrying a deadly weapon makes me more cautious, which could be translated as feeling less safe. But feelings have nothing to do with why I carry.
I genuinely expect to go my entire life, in the country I live, to neither go through, or knowing anyone who goes through an encounter where their life or those of people around them are at risk from an individuals actions.
I expect that I'll carry a gun my entire life and never have occasion to draw it.
However, I do know people who have been at risk. I know women who have been raped, and have a niece who was carjacked at knifepoint. Truthfully all of the people I know personally who have been subject to severe personal violence or risk of severe personal violence are women, which is why I like to see women in my classes and often don't charge them for the course, but things do happen to men, too. This is true in your country as well, even if it is a less violent place than the US.
Giving them your meds is a good idea. If that doesn't work, give them your money, your phone, your shoes, whatever. Unless what they want is to hurt you, don't give them a fight. Of course, if they do want to hurt you, hurt them first and hurt them harder, faster and meaner.
I know this is totally off topic. But it is so fucking depressing that you feel that you need to carry a gun or a knife to be safe.
I don't. I don't carry weapons to feel safe, and I feel perfectly safe when I'm not carrying.
I carry because I believe that society as a whole is safer if there are rational, calm, law-abiding, trained and armed people around at all times. One way to achieve this would be to massively increase the police presence... but that is not only very expensive but has all sorts of negative consequences as those police try to do things to justify their pay. A better approach is licensing of law-abiding civilians. That's why I carry, and why I use my free time to train and certify other people to carry.
Ubuntu and Mint are Debian based, so the Debian total is 65%. Manjaro is Arch-based, so Arch is 28.7%. I also tend to lump RPM-based distros together, Fedora + SUSE + RedHat is at 22.1%.
Personally, I started with Red Hat (5.0 IIRC, and note this is not Red Hat Enterprise Linux, which started a new number sequence), obtained as a boxed set on CDs purchased at Barnes & Noble. It wasn't long before I gave Debian a try, starting with 2.0 (Hamm), and I was hooked. Within a couple of years I had stopped using Windows completely, so Windows 2000 was the last version I used, and that only briefly. For many years I ran Debian unstable, then I backed off to running testing, since it was less fiddly, not that unstable is bad, really. It's quite solid; the name refers to the changing nature of the contents, not to the reliability of the system. Along the way I tinkered with Gentoo, Slack and a few others, but always came back to Debian.
These days I just use my work machines which run a customized version of Ubuntu (desktop) and OS X (laptop). If I did have a personally-owned laptop, it would probably be a MacBook running Debian testing. Though I'd probably give Arch a try. I like the rolling release model and Debian testing undergoes occasional lockdowns as the project gets close to a release. If Arch is less fiddly than Debian unstable, I might like it better.
Do you think the president could have brought pressure on him to be fired if he refused?
He could have asked the board, but it would still just be a request. Unless, as I said, the bailout were conditional upon the resignation. But it explicitly was not.
You only need to use electronic payments, such as a credit card, not necessarily online. Many thefts used compromised readers during a regular in person transaction, though newer cards make this less likely. Ultimately your retailer will typically store your payment information in a database, along with other personally identifying information. This is even more likely with over the phone purchases. Many companies store it in plain text while few properly hash/encrypt it.
The above isn't actually all that true; PCI requirements demand encryption at rest (encryption, not hashing, there's no point in hashing a credit card number). But let's assume that it's true.
Meh. I don't care.
By federal law, my liability for any fraud is limited to $50. In practice, no credit card issuer I've ever met in the US (and I used to do security consulting for credit card issuers, so I've met a lot of them) charges cardholders a penny. If you claim that a transaction is fraudulent, and they can't prove it wasn't, you won't pay a penny. If they're pretty sure you're the fraudster, they'll just cancel your card, and refuse to do business with you any more.
Credit card payment is the safest form of payment, online or in meatspace. Cash is the least safe form of payment.
Note that I'm talking about safety, not privacy. That's a separate issue, and on the privacy axis cash is king and credit cards are awful (though personal checks are significantly worse, assuming you can find someone still willing to accept one).
Note also that debit card transactions (when processed through the debit networks, not as credit cards) do not provide the same protections that credit cards do. Many banks do handle fraud similarly, but you need to get your bank's policy to know. With credit cards, the $50 liability limit is guaranteed by law.
I'll put up a fight before I hand over anything, assuming anyone wants to try me.
I mean this in the kindest possible way, but your'e a damned fool.
I don't care how big you are, or that you have a knife (I carry a gun, myself), the risks involved in getting into a fight are far greater than the value of a few hundred bucks. If you lose the fight, it may be worth your life. Carrying a deadly weapon actually increases that risk in some ways. (Aside: If you carry a lethal weapon, I recommend carrying a less lethal weapon as well, such as OC spray; this is to provide you with an option that allows you to maintain some distance in the event the situation doesn't justify deadly force. You don't want to get into a wrestling mach while carrying a deadly weapon.)
But even if you win the fight, it may still cost you your life, not because you die but because you end up having to defend your actions in court, creating an incredibly stressful situation for yourself, likely destroying your savings, and possibly landing you in prison. Whether your use of deadly force to defend yourself is legal depends on a host of factors, some of them subtle and hard to judge in the heat of the moment, and that's assuming that the actual facts are provable and not something else entirely.
There's also a psychological risk. Killing someone, even if fully justified, seriously messes some people up. Unless you've killed someone before, you do not -- and cannot -- know how it will affect you.
I carry a gun. I'm a concealed weapons permit instructor, so I teach and certify other people to carry guns. I strongly believe in the importance and value of being armed. But if handing over some cash and my cell phone will end the encounter peacefully, I'll hand it over in a heartbeat. A few hundred bucks isn't worth my life. For that matter, it's not worth the life of the mugger, even if the fool is asking for it.
The only way my gun is coming out of concealment is if I have a real belief that my life, or the life of someone else, is at serious risk if I do not. I practice, and teach, a "balance of fears" decision making process, because in a potentially-violent encounter there isn't time to determine the details of justification of force. Instead, I assume that if I draw my gun (or knife; I usually have one of those, too), I will go to prison for it. So, I will only introduce deadly force if I believe that whatever will happen if I don't is worse than going to prison. This makes it fairly certain that I will only use deadly force when it is very easy to justify... and if through a quirk of the situation or the system I end up going to prison for it, well, I believed based on what I knew at the time that that was the better choice.
Clearly, I'm not willing to go to prison over a few hundred dollars, so there's no way I'm using deadly force if I'm pretty certain that just handing over the cash will end it.
You didn't read the post you responded to.
Obama didn't fire Wagoneer, he asked him to resign and Wagoneer agreed.
That's probably the dumbest sentence you've written all week. At the CxO level, no one gets fired.......they are asked to resign. It's the same thing.
It's the same thing when the board asks, because the board could fire the CEO if the request were refused. But the president has no authority to fire employees of private companies, so it truly was just a request.
FYI: You're living in a reality distortion field. You should turn that off.
Obama didn't fire Wagoneer, he asked him to resign and Wagoneer agreed. And the motivation for the request was GM's request for a multi-billion dollar bailout; the resignation wasn't a condition of receiving the bailout, but IMO it would have been perfectly reasonable if it were. If a CEO has to beg the government to save his company, he's clearly failed.
What was your dipshit Obama suckup point again?
Sigh. This is the sad state of what passes for political discussion in the US. One can't state facts that show one side in a bad light without being accused of being partisan for the other side. I didn't care for Obama and I'm glad he's not the the White House any more. That said, I'd gladly trade Trump for just about anybody, Obama included.
I'm always interested in the opinions of folks if any article, regardless of the media source, replaced Trump with Obama in the article.
[John]
I'm no fan of Obama, but I don't think he ever did anything remotely similar to this, (allegedly) threatening to kill a merger unless a news network stops criticizing him. The most he ever did was threaten to exclude Fox from the press pool at an event (and then backed down).
They normally don't sue for violations of the GPL for non-GNU software
They don't sue for any software for which they do not own the copyright, because they would not have standing in court and the case would never make it to court.
The FSF does own some contributions in Linux, and has sued over it. Cisco, for one.
In that case, I find it very surprising that the FSF has not sued.
Sue for what? There is nothing that says that the modifications are released under GPL. As long as the company is willing to provide the original source code without their modifications they are in the clear. They don't even need to publish it on a homepage, they could send it to you on a CD and charge you for the CD, stamps, and work spent on burning the CD.
You need to re-read the GPL. Or a summary of it. Or any discussion of it. Or, really, anything at all about it.
Got any evidence for that? The people I've known like that do both.
In my experience, more talk means less action, no matter what it is.
My experience differs. Oh, some are like that, certainly. But not all.
Maybe, maybe not. I've met enough people like that in real life.
If he were really going to do it, he'd be out doing it, not posting on Slashdot about it.
Got any evidence for that? The people I've known like that do both. Not surprising, really, assholes are assholes everywhere, not just in one forum.
I'll be the one pressing charges for assault and property damage.
You'll be the one getting trolled by an internet tough guy who wouldn't slap a fly on the back of his own hand because it might make him cry.
Maybe, maybe not. I've met enough people like that in real life.
- Water is wet.
What does "wet" mean, exactly? How do we sense wetness? What is a reasonable way to measure wetness? How do different dissolved substances affect the wetness? There are very interesting studies about all of these.
- Summer is warm.
But how warm, and where is it getting warmer and where is it getting cooler, and by how much? This is an area of intensive study.
- Sky is blue
There used to be good questions about why it's blue, but I think those are answered. OTOH, I haven't seen any studies about sky blueness, so this example fails in the other direction; it's well understood so no one studies it.
Brought to you by Captain Obvious Science & Research Institute
You misspelled "Shallow and Incurious Thinking".
Lots of studies of apparently-obvious things are much deeper and more sophisticated than the headlines that filter through reporters' shallow understanding appear. In many cases, studies address well-known phenomena in order to work out detailed models and measurements of the phenomena. In a few cases, studies are done to find out if widespread, "common sense" beliefs are actually true. Sometimes they're not and those are very interesting and useful results, which can only be obtained by studying the "obvious".
I'll be the one walking down the street slapping phones out of the zombie's hands, thanks.
I'll be the one pressing charges for assault and property damage.
That's the name I have for them. I still wonder if they're slowly pecking out "Brains!" while they stagger along eyes down peering at their phone while they walk out in front of traffic...
I learned to do this long before I ever got a phone. As a kid in the late 70s and early to mid 80s I read a lot of books while walking, especially to and from school.
Obligatory XKCD.
That's the name I have for them. I still wonder if they're slowly pecking out "Brains!" while they stagger along eyes down peering at their phone while they walk out in front of traffic...
I learned to do this long before I ever got a phone. As a kid in the late 70s and early to mid 80s I read a lot of books while walking, especially to and from school.
In other words, there are additions and/or modifications to the source code used to generate the kernel that are not made public. Meaning that you cannot yourself generate a functional kernel for the unit using the standard open-source kernel processes. You therefore cannot customize the kernel for your special needs and you don't really have any way to know what possible nefarious activities it's up to.
In that case, I find it very surprising that the FSF has not sued. They normally don't sue for violations of the GPL for non-GNU software, but they make an exception for Linux.
While this is funny, chances are that most violently anti-pedos are indeed closet-pedos.
Some, anyway. "Most" is a pretty strong claim. In this case, I'm sure many violent anti-pedos are anti because they were abused as children and want to make sure it never happens again (and some of them may have pedophilic tendencies as a result of their abuse, but they're not "closet pedos" if they never act on those tendencies).