What do you think of the way your administration is handling things the last 10 years?
We had two different administrations over the last ten years. Of course, the cynical won't admit much of a difference between them, and the realist tends to agree.
Don't you just hate the fact that big companies seem to have alot more influence on politics than the average Joe has?
Are you implying that the rest of the world is different? Or is this EU patent vote a purely philosophical exercise in intellectual property theory?
aside: Having worked for both US and European corporations, I greatly prefer the ones from the US. I get more respect, less racism, fewer SEC investigations, etc. Every US company I've worked for has given my profit sharing, stock options or discounts, and generally made me feel a part of a "family". My current German corporations forbids me from owning any of its stock, and has rescinded raises this year for US workers despite a 14% growth. It is currently testifying before US Congress on its illegal employment practices.
Shouldn't this be changed as soon as possible to protect the rights you as a citizen should have?
The whole idea of corporations being the enemy is facade. So I'll ignore them and tell you what the real problem is in the US. Government. It was govenmernt that created the artificial concept of "corporation". It was government that created the marketplace of influence peddling. Corporations don't go to congress and point guns a politician's head forcing them to vote a certain way. It's quite the opposite. It is the congressmen that go out into the world with a big "for sale" sign on their chests looking for the highest bidder.
But the US people are slowly waking up to this selloff of their rights. The Democratic party is losing voters to the Greens. The Republican party is facing a grass roots libertarian takeover from within. People are voting out the career politicians, and instituting term limits. Though the world laughs at the upcoming California recall election, it's not about movie actors and circus performers, it's about tossing out a lifetime politician.
Frankly, other than lobbying for absurd laws, corporations really don't impinge upon my liberties. In this regard they're not much different in my eyes than those people shouting "there need's to be a law" everytime they stub their toes.
How did this happen? Why did you all allow this to happen?
You might want to ask yourself the same questions, because it appears that Europe is only a few meters behind the US in the mad dash to tyranny. Asia's already waiting for us at the finish line.
Just what is your definition of free speech, by the way? I've exercised my right of free speech my entire life without once having to skim file lists of child porn.
And what the heck is wrong with 32MB? Most people have better things to do than go upgrade their systems everytime Bill Gates yells "boo" or Tom's Hardware has a fart.
Do you also bitch at people who eat mac-n-cheese instead of filet mignon?
Don't know if it would be hard to get the same functionallity in the BSDs without using portage, or if there already are a few alternatives which works almost the same way.
There are things in FreeBSD that work almost the same way. But they tend to be much more specific than what Gentoo users are used to. They're informally called "knobs" and can be put in the global/etc/make.conf file to apply to everything, or used on a per-port basis. Adding new knobs is not that hard, but you have to go through and make sure the affected ports use them.
The biggest problem with the knobs is that they are not fully documented. For example, there is a very useful "WITHOUT_X11" knob that several ports respect, but which isn't mentioned in the Handbook or FAQ.
The "WITHOUT-X11" knob is described in the porter's handbook, but that isn't an end-user document, so many people skip over it. Perhaps the Handbook needs another page in the ports and packages section.
"-gnome" would be much more useful example, since there are many apps that can be built with or without gnome support, but I am not aware of any that Qt applications that can optionally use KDE. If you don't want to build any KDE applications, then simply don't build any KDE applications. Since nothing but KDE applications depend on KDE, this is the simplest solution.
Do we really need to throw out stable and robust ports entirely just because you like the USE flags? If it's so desperately wanted by you, then perhaps you could actually code it up. It's all just simple makefiles, so you don't even need to learn python.
There already are "USE" flags of a sort, but they're more specific than the general purpose flags that Gentoo uses. Adding some new flags should be a piece of cake, if you can convince the committers of their need.
Re:Follow the money
on
Support FreeBSD
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
The jewel box CDs are CD-Rs with inkjet printed labels? They look pretty damned professional to me. You can't even see where the inkjet paper blends into the actual CD. In fact, I can't tell the difference in CD quality between the latest 4.8 jewel box and the old Walnut Creek jewel boxes.
Methinks you have your facts wrong. Perhaps you're referring to something other than FreeBSD Mall.
I've got high speed internet access via DSL, but I don't have "broadband". I'm not even sure I can get genuine "broadband" in my high-tech metropolitan area without paying out the nose for it.
I wish the media would stop redefining words because they're too lazy to look them up.
Re:Even Apple knew enough to change
on
Support FreeBSD
·
· Score: 1
Who the hell marked this as "informative"? "Funny" maybe, "informative" absolutely not. This post was an obvious sarcasm to the previous whine about tcsh.
The big question on my mind is "why?" Why would I want to use portage instead of ports? Why would I want to use a copy when I already have the original?
That goes without saying. But is there really room in the Linux integration market for each and every one of the thousands upon thousands of developers who contributed to the software you use? I seriously doubt it. The fact remains that saying "I give back" doesn't feed the people who do most of the work.
So what? They're not talking about patents, but about copyrights. You don't have a contract with them. You clicked-thru no agreements with them. They could potentially force you to remove Linux from your system, but they can't make you pay for it.
No no no. The macintosh doesn't count. We're Linux weenies it doesn't count because we say it doesn't count. Stop making Microsoft out to be less than a complete and total monopoly in the computer industry.
Dual copyleft/proprietary licensing may work for development libraries (Qt, Sleepycat), but I don't know of one example anywhere of it working for end-user software.
As a developer, the GPL says that everything I write using a GPL library is a derivative work. I either buy the proprietary license or I am forced to GPL everything I create. But as a user, no images I create are derivative of GIMP, no emails I send are derivative of Evolution, and no documents I create are derivative of AbiWord.
To paraphrase an executive of Trolltech, "why should we base our business model on crappy software? Our goal is to create software that doesn't NEED support."
I must strenously disagree. Why must software always be treated as some foreign concept that must not follow the business models of other industries? You don't see cybercafe's growing and milling their own wheat, so why should you expect them to code their own software?
Someone needs to write that software for the cybercafe. But why does it have to be their chef? Surely a professional programmer would create the better software, but if he can't cook, are you going to fire him once he finishes writing it?
You don't see people assembling their own automobiles. Instead you see a specialized industry devoted to automobiles. You rarely see businesses hiring an automotive technician, but instead you see them going to a specialized shop.
If you don't get the point, let me translate your opening statement for the automotive industry: "Perhaps we shouldn't be trying to commercialise automobiles. Perhaps we should be trying to commercialise the businesses and products/services which rely on automobiles."
Yes, I know you're not an economist. If you were, you would realize the answer: let the market decide, since they're the ones who need the software in the first place. In a free market of software there will be room for many different models. Traditionally it has been a "software-as-product" model coupled with restrictive licensing. But that is changing even today. I suspect that a balance will be reached between proprietary and open source software. I don't know what that balance is, but I'm pretty darned sure it isn't going to be zero to one. I also strongly suspect that there will be different business models for different categories of software.
In the meantime, those of us who WANT to make a living writing free and open source software need more options than just being told to wait on tables at the local cybercafe.
Well, most users can tell the difference between a manual printed via MSWord and one printed via professional tools. For some products this makes no difference. But for others it brands the entire product line with the monicker "cheap". Go ahead and use MSWord all you want for your drafts, but use something else for your printing.
That was for telling people how to counter Adobe's lame ROT13 encryption. It was stupid, Adobe were assholes, and the DOJ had their head up their collective asses, but it had absolutely nothing to do with PDF as a format.
Before using Ximian Connector you must have:... OWA (Outlook Web Access) active on the Exchange 2000 Server
So in other words, the IT department must take special steps to enable the use of Ximian Connector (or open source Korganizer/Aethera). OWA has no benefits for an Outlook-only company.
I could dump Windows entirely at work if only I could think of a way to convince IT to turn on web access.
Slashdot Mirror
What do you think of the way your administration is handling things the last 10 years?
We had two different administrations over the last ten years. Of course, the cynical won't admit much of a difference between them, and the realist tends to agree.
Don't you just hate the fact that big companies seem to have alot more influence on politics than the average Joe has?
Are you implying that the rest of the world is different? Or is this EU patent vote a purely philosophical exercise in intellectual property theory?
aside: Having worked for both US and European corporations, I greatly prefer the ones from the US. I get more respect, less racism, fewer SEC investigations, etc. Every US company I've worked for has given my profit sharing, stock options or discounts, and generally made me feel a part of a "family". My current German corporations forbids me from owning any of its stock, and has rescinded raises this year for US workers despite a 14% growth. It is currently testifying before US Congress on its illegal employment practices.
Shouldn't this be changed as soon as possible to protect the rights you as a citizen should have?
The whole idea of corporations being the enemy is facade. So I'll ignore them and tell you what the real problem is in the US. Government. It was govenmernt that created the artificial concept of "corporation". It was government that created the marketplace of influence peddling. Corporations don't go to congress and point guns a politician's head forcing them to vote a certain way. It's quite the opposite. It is the congressmen that go out into the world with a big "for sale" sign on their chests looking for the highest bidder.
But the US people are slowly waking up to this selloff of their rights. The Democratic party is losing voters to the Greens. The Republican party is facing a grass roots libertarian takeover from within. People are voting out the career politicians, and instituting term limits. Though the world laughs at the upcoming California recall election, it's not about movie actors and circus performers, it's about tossing out a lifetime politician.
Frankly, other than lobbying for absurd laws, corporations really don't impinge upon my liberties. In this regard they're not much different in my eyes than those people shouting "there need's to be a law" everytime they stub their toes.
How did this happen? Why did you all allow this to happen?
You might want to ask yourself the same questions, because it appears that Europe is only a few meters behind the US in the mad dash to tyranny. Asia's already waiting for us at the finish line.
The prior poster's comment was not arguing that the US was a bed of roses, but that other nations keep following the US' lead.
The US has software patents. The EU is on the verge of enacting some of its own.
The US is fscking up Iraq. The UN wants to get involved so it can fsck Iraq as bad as it did in Kosovo.
The US corporations are running amock. The European and Asian corporations are falling all over themselves trying to outdo the US corporations.
The US has soldiers stationed in airports. We were slow on this one, as that has been commonplace in Europe for a decade.
The US arrests a Russian programmer. Norway arrests a Norwegian programmer.
I could go on, but the point is, there is no perfect nation in the world. All are tyrannies differing only in minor degrees.
Just what is your definition of free speech, by the way? I've exercised my right of free speech my entire life without once having to skim file lists of child porn.
Alec Baldwin is still here, and he's more well off that everyone on Slashdot put together. Promises promises...
But the point is you don't have to rewrite all your filter rules every other minor release. Plus you get the benefit of choice. Win win.
And what the heck is wrong with 32MB? Most people have better things to do than go upgrade their systems everytime Bill Gates yells "boo" or Tom's Hardware has a fart.
Do you also bitch at people who eat mac-n-cheese instead of filet mignon?
Don't know if it would be hard to get the same functionallity in the BSDs without using portage, or if there already are a few alternatives which works almost the same way.
/etc/make.conf file to apply to everything, or used on a per-port basis. Adding new knobs is not that hard, but you have to go through and make sure the affected ports use them.
There are things in FreeBSD that work almost the same way. But they tend to be much more specific than what Gentoo users are used to. They're informally called "knobs" and can be put in the global
The biggest problem with the knobs is that they are not fully documented. For example, there is a very useful "WITHOUT_X11" knob that several ports respect, but which isn't mentioned in the Handbook or FAQ.
The "WITHOUT-X11" knob is described in the porter's handbook, but that isn't an end-user document, so many people skip over it. Perhaps the Handbook needs another page in the ports and packages section.
They don't make you change firewall code with every major kernel release.
:-)
Thankfully, it's FreeBSD you're talking about, and not another unnamed BSD system that I am aware of
but not compile kde and cups support.
"-gnome" would be much more useful example, since there are many apps that can be built with or without gnome support, but I am not aware of any that Qt applications that can optionally use KDE. If you don't want to build any KDE applications, then simply don't build any KDE applications. Since nothing but KDE applications depend on KDE, this is the simplest solution.
Do we really need to throw out stable and robust ports entirely just because you like the USE flags? If it's so desperately wanted by you, then perhaps you could actually code it up. It's all just simple makefiles, so you don't even need to learn python.
There already are "USE" flags of a sort, but they're more specific than the general purpose flags that Gentoo uses. Adding some new flags should be a piece of cake, if you can convince the committers of their need.
The jewel box CDs are CD-Rs with inkjet printed labels? They look pretty damned professional to me. You can't even see where the inkjet paper blends into the actual CD. In fact, I can't tell the difference in CD quality between the latest 4.8 jewel box and the old Walnut Creek jewel boxes.
Methinks you have your facts wrong. Perhaps you're referring to something other than FreeBSD Mall.
I've got high speed internet access via DSL, but I don't have "broadband". I'm not even sure I can get genuine "broadband" in my high-tech metropolitan area without paying out the nose for it.
I wish the media would stop redefining words because they're too lazy to look them up.
Who the hell marked this as "informative"? "Funny" maybe, "informative" absolutely not. This post was an obvious sarcasm to the previous whine about tcsh.
The big question on my mind is "why?" Why would I want to use portage instead of ports? Why would I want to use a copy when I already have the original?
That goes without saying. But is there really room in the Linux integration market for each and every one of the thousands upon thousands of developers who contributed to the software you use? I seriously doubt it. The fact remains that saying "I give back" doesn't feed the people who do most of the work.
So what? They're not talking about patents, but about copyrights. You don't have a contract with them. You clicked-thru no agreements with them. They could potentially force you to remove Linux from your system, but they can't make you pay for it.
No no no. The macintosh doesn't count. We're Linux weenies it doesn't count because we say it doesn't count. Stop making Microsoft out to be less than a complete and total monopoly in the computer industry.
Dual copyleft/proprietary licensing may work for development libraries (Qt, Sleepycat), but I don't know of one example anywhere of it working for end-user software.
As a developer, the GPL says that everything I write using a GPL library is a derivative work. I either buy the proprietary license or I am forced to GPL everything I create. But as a user, no images I create are derivative of GIMP, no emails I send are derivative of Evolution, and no documents I create are derivative of AbiWord.
Most of the change I make to OSS goes back into it
And how much of the money you make goes into the hands of the original developer? After all, your bug fix doesn't put food on their table.
To paraphrase an executive of Trolltech, "why should we base our business model on crappy software? Our goal is to create software that doesn't NEED support."
I must strenously disagree. Why must software always be treated as some foreign concept that must not follow the business models of other industries? You don't see cybercafe's growing and milling their own wheat, so why should you expect them to code their own software?
Someone needs to write that software for the cybercafe. But why does it have to be their chef? Surely a professional programmer would create the better software, but if he can't cook, are you going to fire him once he finishes writing it?
You don't see people assembling their own automobiles. Instead you see a specialized industry devoted to automobiles. You rarely see businesses hiring an automotive technician, but instead you see them going to a specialized shop.
If you don't get the point, let me translate your opening statement for the automotive industry: "Perhaps we shouldn't be trying to commercialise automobiles. Perhaps we should be trying to commercialise the businesses and products/services which rely on automobiles."
Yes, I know you're not an economist. If you were, you would realize the answer: let the market decide, since they're the ones who need the software in the first place. In a free market of software there will be room for many different models. Traditionally it has been a "software-as-product" model coupled with restrictive licensing. But that is changing even today. I suspect that a balance will be reached between proprietary and open source software. I don't know what that balance is, but I'm pretty darned sure it isn't going to be zero to one. I also strongly suspect that there will be different business models for different categories of software.
In the meantime, those of us who WANT to make a living writing free and open source software need more options than just being told to wait on tables at the local cybercafe.
Well, most users can tell the difference between a manual printed via MSWord and one printed via professional tools. For some products this makes no difference. But for others it brands the entire product line with the monicker "cheap". Go ahead and use MSWord all you want for your drafts, but use something else for your printing.
That was for telling people how to counter Adobe's lame ROT13 encryption. It was stupid, Adobe were assholes, and the DOJ had their head up their collective asses, but it had absolutely nothing to do with PDF as a format.
Gee, do you work for the same company I do? We even call the IT support line by the same name!
From the Ximian Connector page:
... OWA (Outlook Web Access) active on the Exchange 2000 Server
Before using Ximian Connector you must have:
So in other words, the IT department must take special steps to enable the use of Ximian Connector (or open source Korganizer/Aethera). OWA has no benefits for an Outlook-only company.
I could dump Windows entirely at work if only I could think of a way to convince IT to turn on web access.