Agreed whole-heartedly. Considering what little I do with my Mac besides simple web work and app development, 10.7 crashes all the time, and for really bizarre things like the Login screen freezing if I'm switching between user accounts with different power-saving options. I call Lion the Vista of Mac OS - unfinished, unpolished, and full of really stupid bugs. I remember Snow Leopard being a lot less finicky.
Windows 7 has been rock solid since day one. Better than XP, uptimes measured in months, even on my gaming rig. Faster than Vista. I'd say they've done a hell of a great job, which is perhaps why people are so skeptical of Win8 with its radical changes. It could be another Vista trainwreck, which means we'll have to wait for Win9 before they get it right again.
Windows 7 added a few simple keyboard shortcuts to quickly move windows around and dock them to the left or right half of a monitor. It does the same if you drag a window to the edges of a monitor. I can't speak for the GP, but personally I have not needed a 3rd party window manager since this addition. I can't even remember the software I was using back in the XP days, but it basically did the same thing.
Since most well-behaved Windows apps remember their position on exit, this is just peachy. If they don't, proper alignment is just a few keystrokes away. Combined with the Win+(digit) shortcuts for the first 9 items on the start bar (docked or running apps), I don't even touch the mouse for most of my work.
It's not just you. When I read the title, I assumed it was just another sloppy/ignorant editor exaggerating things, because to me, Windows 7 already feels fully hardware accelerated. I thought that was the whole point of Aero Glass. I didn't notice any UI sluggishness, not on my balls-out gaming rig, nor the wife's 3 year old AMD with integrated graphics. Really, since I started plopping SSDs in all my machines, that was the only variable I could feel anymore in general browser-heavy usage. Everything else seemed to have reached a plateau.
If Win8 is even faster, well great. Efficiency is always welcome, it will hopefully translate into longer battery life for laptops and tablets.
Well then you can't blame the software for a hardware failure. I was running my original Windows 7 installation until a few days ago, when I decided to start fresh. 3 years without any significant problems, it's been the smoothest experience so far. I distinctly remember the day it launched, my coworkers asked about it, and they had to ask twice when they heard me speak the words "Windows 7 is fucking awesome". This, coming from a guy running a heavily-modified Gentoo-KDE workstation, bragging about 300-day uptime with XP relegated to a tiny VM on a side monitor.
3 years later, well, I still think Windows 7 is great. Does what I expect from Windows, nothing more, nothing less. Runs fast, supports all my hardware, sleeps/resumes without a hitch, uptime is dependent on whether I care to install monthly updates. Pretty much my only gripe is I wish the default shell were Bash instead of CMD (and Cygwin still sucks).
When I talk of people not pulling their weight, I primarily mean the financial industry and other members of the super-wealthy elite, who produce absolutely nothing of value yet consume more resources than hundreds or even thousands of normal citizens.
We spend so much of our lives manufacturing useless doodads and "creating jobs" which only serve to move money around with zero net benefit to humanity, while at the same time stifling true innovation by tying up our minds in menial tasks.
Here are just a few examples of things within our technological reach, but aren't profitable enough to implement: - rapid public transit - sustainable farming - preventive health care - comfortable, energy-wise housing for everyone - actual scientific research not tied to a short-term saleable product or military application
That's real nice. It's also an overly broad generalisation. I'm not saying it's wrong, but my gripe is with the social pressure to conform to that very narrow tradition, not monogamy itself.
I guess what I originally meant was: people change, and nobody can predict the future, so how can anyone thoughtfully make a life-long commitment ? I have no idea if, some years from now, my partner will turn into a spiteful parasitic sack of protoplasm, therefore I reserve the right to bug out, and vice versa. We humans have better things to do than waste our limited lifespans on irrational bullshit.
My opinions have nothing to do with it. Creating a psychoactive chemical compound does not require hurting someone. Buy ingredients, process, sell to eager thrill seekers. Pragmatically speaking, it's no different than making a grilled cheese sandwich.
Sex and organ trafficking, by definition, involve hurting another person (against their will).
Let's not lump drug trafficking in with sex and organ trafficking. The latter are heinous atrocities, the former is a contrived product of repressive government policy.
Drug trafficking would never have become a problem if governments hadn't created the giant void in the market that allowed them to exist in the first place. People want to get high, they will do so whether the nanny statists like it or not.
Please show me how to live in the western world without money. Because without it you are going to have a crappy life especially when you get sick.
This is a very U.S.-centric notion. If I get sick, my national healthcare will provide all needed services. I know that's a hot debate topic these days, at least from what I can glean of the political noise.
I like the joke though. I'm no Mexican, but I do subscribe to that fisherman's mentality. I strive to keep my work life and recreation in balance, which sometimes means mixing the two. Who says a man can't pound back pints of fine IPA while pounding out lines of code ? Now, if only my clients could all meet me at the pub...
We're making it work, in equal parts due to my partner being a couples counselor (!) and me being abnormally patient and pragmatic. We talk things out from an informed and intellectual perspective. People just tend to confide in us and seek advice (whether we like it or not), we have that ambiguous quality, and still it is difficult at times to solve our own seemingly simple issues. I can't even begin to appreciate how frustrating it must be for people without the unfair advantage of a psych background.
To suggest that huge pile of work as a "solution" to black hat hackers which may already suffer from very poor social skills, well that's just plain cruel.
You're right about needs, but money is not a need, because it's an abstract concept. Quality of living is a need. The concept of poverty, in a developed world, is a very contrived and nonsensical artifact of capitalism. We have enough resources to feed, house, clothe and entertain the whole world several times over, yet our societal systems create false scarcity as the hypothetical carrot-on-a-stick to keep people enslaved and working.
It doesn't matter how much money is being thrown around, or how big the numbers grow, if someone isn't pulling their weight, they will cause a shortage somewhere else. The illusion of money only takes our eyes off the real issue of distributing resources. After all, why associate with millions of other people if we only seek to break them down and take what's theirs ? Building, not pillaging, should be the goal of any society. Wealth means nothing if you spend every waking moment in misery and frustration.
I'd refine that by stating that the concept of a girlfriend is more fun. Once it enters practical application, things get (needlessly) complicated and un-fun. It takes years to learn how to make things work in a couple, and a great majority of us never even figure it out (hint: people are stupid/ignorant/oblivious/irresponsible).
We're going on 7 years (or is it 8?), and I still think of her as a giant pain in the ass and frustrating hurdle on my path to enlightenment. But hey, tits and a 2nd income almost make it worth the pain. Almost.
So, you're saying that anyone who doesn't subscribe to the notion of marriage is a douchebag ?
We get thrust into the tradition of long-term relationships because that's how babies are made. It doesn't mean that's what we want, but for most teens, mating is propped up as the ultimate goal. If you're still single in your mid twenties, you're a fuckup. If you're unmarried by your thirties, you're a big fuckup. If you're childless into your forties, you're mega-hitler. There is so much irrational social pressure on forming sexual relationships that it completely ignores the individual's wants and needs.
You're right about one thing: life is full of problems. If a person decides that marriage is a set of problems not worth solving, then divorce is a GOOD THING. Each person has to decide what's best for themselves. For me, a relationship has to add to my existing life, not replace it. Compromise has to result in mutual gain, else it's just another form of oppression and oppression drives people mad.
Just because my partner tolerates all the stupid shit I do, and I tolerate hers, does not automagically make us happy. It just means we're complacent. I see the traditional long-term monogamous relationship as a bizarre vestigial custom. We don't know why we do it, we just do. Social pressures and all... Yet there are some of us who might have grander aspirations than breeding and feeding.
Sure, relationship issues can be overcome, just like any other problems in life. The real question is thus: what would you rather spend your life doing ? Tiptoeing around your partner's family-of-origin-rooted insecurities, or mastering the fine art of craft brewing ? There are only so many days in a life, and if someone prefers not to spend them in emotionally-charged conundrums, I see nothing wrong with that choice.
It's been around for a while, yes, but it does require a bit more coding, and since a staggering number of these shady freemium apps are written by copy-paste coders, they've probably been using the non-verified method, because to their eyes it does what they want.
They might fix it if this workaround becomes too mainstream, but even then, an updated binary would be required in most cases. The cat is out of the bag. Anything going over the network can now be spoofed. Even the verification could be spoofed if so desired. I hope all the Zyngas of the world had their fun while it lasted.
What I'm saying is, if it's a slow news day, then let's not stoop to advertising black-hat services. I know the quality of posts on here has gone to shit, but this takes the cake. The shit-cake.
I've never personally signed up for cable TV. My partner had it when we moved in together, but a few years ago we ditched that too. I'd like to say that, if we were in the U.S., we might get by with Hulu and Netflix, but up here in Canada the pickings are very slim, and iTunes rentals don't play nice with XBMC, so I just leech everything off of Usenet and/or torrents. It's not that we can't afford those services, but the content we want simply isn't on offer, thanks to moronic regional licensing bullshit.
I did the whole free-to-air pirate satellite thing for a few months. That sucked. The best part was the 25 channels of 24/7 porn - dead serious. That "paid programming" shit was all over the grid. I think they had a dozen different infomercials featuring the same get-rich-quick guy, 24/7. And the nature of satellite PPV meant that each movie had 10 channels with staggered start times. Convenient, I guess, but across all 500 or so channels, you had maybe 200 hours of non-repeat programming per week. Even at $0 a month, I tired of it very quickly and sold off my dish and receiver less than 3 months later.
Today, the only wires entering my home are for internet and power. The only thing I miss are live sports, on those rare occasions when I'd be inclined to watch (playoffs, mostly). Solution: go to a pub with the guys, have some beers, eat some wings, watch on the big screen, no monthly subscription required.
The difference here is that Viacom does not own DirecTV. These so-called content owners pull the same bundling bullshit on distributors, which is another reason why unbundling should be mandated by law. Why should DirecTV have to carry (and pay for) a pile of shitty channels, just to get the one their customers actually want ?
Yes, consumers are ignorant and too lazy to stick to their guns, but the problem doesn't magically stop at the distributor's head-end. It's a dirty industry from top to bottom.
I agree with the past four or five administrations' policies. Anything that results in the collapse of New Rome can only be a good thing, for all but the uber-rich-uber-useless fascist elite. Good for the common American, good for everyone else on this planet who is sick of wars for profit and the negative-value media endemic to U.S. corporate lobbying.
I read about these things, I've experimented with a lot of them, because I've been a coder since diapers. This is what I do for fun, oddly enough. I've read about and toyed with closures until it "clicked", but even then I still couldn't find a legitimate use for them. Sure, there were a few "hey I could pull this stunt" moments, but it was nothing more than a cheap hack, in lieu of a slightly more laborious but classically understood approach.
If there is a common problem that is elegantly and optimally solved by closures, I have yet to encounter it. Unless that problem is having too many spare CPU cycles and not enough recursive stack frames.
<sarcasm>Because bike helmets are ULTRA GAAAAAAY.</sarcasm>
The helmet does fuckall, that's why. It's a great cash cow for helmet manufacturers, but unless you're a competitive racer, the helmet is really useless. It does not offer any protection in the most common types of accidents seen in urban settings: sideswipes and t-bones. It also doesn't account for the fact that the great majority of urban cyclists are morons, completely oblivious to their surroundings and not in control of their bike. In other words, they ride the same way they drive their car. Helmets don't protect you from your own stupidity.
Not too long ago, some guy died by smashing into a light pole, instantly crushing his neck. What was he doing riding at high speed on the sidewalk ? Being a moron, that's what.
W3Schools is a website for people with an interest for web technologies. These people are more interested in using alternative browsers than the average user. The average user tends to the browser that comes preinstalled with their computer, and do not seek out other browser alternatives.
These facts indicate that the browser figures above are not 100% realistic. Other web sites have statistics showing that Internet Explorer is a more popular browser.
Glitch0, please submit your résumé to CNN. They greatly value your kind of selective reading skills.
Slashdot Mirror
Agreed whole-heartedly. Considering what little I do with my Mac besides simple web work and app development, 10.7 crashes all the time, and for really bizarre things like the Login screen freezing if I'm switching between user accounts with different power-saving options. I call Lion the Vista of Mac OS - unfinished, unpolished, and full of really stupid bugs. I remember Snow Leopard being a lot less finicky.
Windows 7 has been rock solid since day one. Better than XP, uptimes measured in months, even on my gaming rig. Faster than Vista. I'd say they've done a hell of a great job, which is perhaps why people are so skeptical of Win8 with its radical changes. It could be another Vista trainwreck, which means we'll have to wait for Win9 before they get it right again.
Windows 7 added a few simple keyboard shortcuts to quickly move windows around and dock them to the left or right half of a monitor. It does the same if you drag a window to the edges of a monitor. I can't speak for the GP, but personally I have not needed a 3rd party window manager since this addition. I can't even remember the software I was using back in the XP days, but it basically did the same thing.
Since most well-behaved Windows apps remember their position on exit, this is just peachy. If they don't, proper alignment is just a few keystrokes away. Combined with the Win+(digit) shortcuts for the first 9 items on the start bar (docked or running apps), I don't even touch the mouse for most of my work.
Here's a list of those shortcuts at Lifehacker
It's not just you. When I read the title, I assumed it was just another sloppy/ignorant editor exaggerating things, because to me, Windows 7 already feels fully hardware accelerated. I thought that was the whole point of Aero Glass. I didn't notice any UI sluggishness, not on my balls-out gaming rig, nor the wife's 3 year old AMD with integrated graphics. Really, since I started plopping SSDs in all my machines, that was the only variable I could feel anymore in general browser-heavy usage. Everything else seemed to have reached a plateau.
If Win8 is even faster, well great. Efficiency is always welcome, it will hopefully translate into longer battery life for laptops and tablets.
Well then you can't blame the software for a hardware failure. I was running my original Windows 7 installation until a few days ago, when I decided to start fresh. 3 years without any significant problems, it's been the smoothest experience so far. I distinctly remember the day it launched, my coworkers asked about it, and they had to ask twice when they heard me speak the words "Windows 7 is fucking awesome". This, coming from a guy running a heavily-modified Gentoo-KDE workstation, bragging about 300-day uptime with XP relegated to a tiny VM on a side monitor.
3 years later, well, I still think Windows 7 is great. Does what I expect from Windows, nothing more, nothing less. Runs fast, supports all my hardware, sleeps/resumes without a hitch, uptime is dependent on whether I care to install monthly updates. Pretty much my only gripe is I wish the default shell were Bash instead of CMD (and Cygwin still sucks).
When I talk of people not pulling their weight, I primarily mean the financial industry and other members of the super-wealthy elite, who produce absolutely nothing of value yet consume more resources than hundreds or even thousands of normal citizens.
We spend so much of our lives manufacturing useless doodads and "creating jobs" which only serve to move money around with zero net benefit to humanity, while at the same time stifling true innovation by tying up our minds in menial tasks.
Here are just a few examples of things within our technological reach, but aren't profitable enough to implement:
- rapid public transit
- sustainable farming
- preventive health care
- comfortable, energy-wise housing for everyone
- actual scientific research not tied to a short-term saleable product or military application
That's real nice. It's also an overly broad generalisation. I'm not saying it's wrong, but my gripe is with the social pressure to conform to that very narrow tradition, not monogamy itself.
I guess what I originally meant was: people change, and nobody can predict the future, so how can anyone thoughtfully make a life-long commitment ? I have no idea if, some years from now, my partner will turn into a spiteful parasitic sack of protoplasm, therefore I reserve the right to bug out, and vice versa. We humans have better things to do than waste our limited lifespans on irrational bullshit.
Sure, they're shift their focus to other niches, but those niches are several orders of magnitude smaller. Their income will plummet.
Concurrently, it would also free up law enforcement resources to fight those sex and organ traffickers.
I see this as a win-win: minimize the attack surface, maximize police attention.
My opinions have nothing to do with it. Creating a psychoactive chemical compound does not require hurting someone. Buy ingredients, process, sell to eager thrill seekers. Pragmatically speaking, it's no different than making a grilled cheese sandwich.
Sex and organ trafficking, by definition, involve hurting another person (against their will).
Let's not lump drug trafficking in with sex and organ trafficking. The latter are heinous atrocities, the former is a contrived product of repressive government policy.
Drug trafficking would never have become a problem if governments hadn't created the giant void in the market that allowed them to exist in the first place. People want to get high, they will do so whether the nanny statists like it or not.
Please show me how to live in the western world without money. Because without it you are going to have a crappy life especially when you get sick.
This is a very U.S.-centric notion. If I get sick, my national healthcare will provide all needed services. I know that's a hot debate topic these days, at least from what I can glean of the political noise.
I like the joke though. I'm no Mexican, but I do subscribe to that fisherman's mentality. I strive to keep my work life and recreation in balance, which sometimes means mixing the two. Who says a man can't pound back pints of fine IPA while pounding out lines of code ? Now, if only my clients could all meet me at the pub...
We're making it work, in equal parts due to my partner being a couples counselor (!) and me being abnormally patient and pragmatic. We talk things out from an informed and intellectual perspective. People just tend to confide in us and seek advice (whether we like it or not), we have that ambiguous quality, and still it is difficult at times to solve our own seemingly simple issues. I can't even begin to appreciate how frustrating it must be for people without the unfair advantage of a psych background.
To suggest that huge pile of work as a "solution" to black hat hackers which may already suffer from very poor social skills, well that's just plain cruel.
You're right about needs, but money is not a need, because it's an abstract concept. Quality of living is a need. The concept of poverty, in a developed world, is a very contrived and nonsensical artifact of capitalism. We have enough resources to feed, house, clothe and entertain the whole world several times over, yet our societal systems create false scarcity as the hypothetical carrot-on-a-stick to keep people enslaved and working.
It doesn't matter how much money is being thrown around, or how big the numbers grow, if someone isn't pulling their weight, they will cause a shortage somewhere else. The illusion of money only takes our eyes off the real issue of distributing resources. After all, why associate with millions of other people if we only seek to break them down and take what's theirs ? Building, not pillaging, should be the goal of any society. Wealth means nothing if you spend every waking moment in misery and frustration.
I'd refine that by stating that the concept of a girlfriend is more fun. Once it enters practical application, things get (needlessly) complicated and un-fun. It takes years to learn how to make things work in a couple, and a great majority of us never even figure it out (hint: people are stupid/ignorant/oblivious/irresponsible).
We're going on 7 years (or is it 8?), and I still think of her as a giant pain in the ass and frustrating hurdle on my path to enlightenment. But hey, tits and a 2nd income almost make it worth the pain. Almost.
(ugh, fuckin' AC)
So, you're saying that anyone who doesn't subscribe to the notion of marriage is a douchebag ?
We get thrust into the tradition of long-term relationships because that's how babies are made. It doesn't mean that's what we want, but for most teens, mating is propped up as the ultimate goal. If you're still single in your mid twenties, you're a fuckup. If you're unmarried by your thirties, you're a big fuckup. If you're childless into your forties, you're mega-hitler. There is so much irrational social pressure on forming sexual relationships that it completely ignores the individual's wants and needs.
You're right about one thing: life is full of problems. If a person decides that marriage is a set of problems not worth solving, then divorce is a GOOD THING. Each person has to decide what's best for themselves. For me, a relationship has to add to my existing life, not replace it. Compromise has to result in mutual gain, else it's just another form of oppression and oppression drives people mad.
Just because my partner tolerates all the stupid shit I do, and I tolerate hers, does not automagically make us happy. It just means we're complacent. I see the traditional long-term monogamous relationship as a bizarre vestigial custom. We don't know why we do it, we just do. Social pressures and all... Yet there are some of us who might have grander aspirations than breeding and feeding.
Sure, relationship issues can be overcome, just like any other problems in life. The real question is thus: what would you rather spend your life doing ? Tiptoeing around your partner's family-of-origin-rooted insecurities, or mastering the fine art of craft brewing ? There are only so many days in a life, and if someone prefers not to spend them in emotionally-charged conundrums, I see nothing wrong with that choice.
Disclaimer: app developer here.
It's been around for a while, yes, but it does require a bit more coding, and since a staggering number of these shady freemium apps are written by copy-paste coders, they've probably been using the non-verified method, because to their eyes it does what they want.
They might fix it if this workaround becomes too mainstream, but even then, an updated binary would be required in most cases. The cat is out of the bag. Anything going over the network can now be spoofed. Even the verification could be spoofed if so desired. I hope all the Zyngas of the world had their fun while it lasted.
Eat a dick, AC.
What I'm saying is, if it's a slow news day, then let's not stoop to advertising black-hat services. I know the quality of posts on here has gone to shit, but this takes the cake. The shit-cake.
This is moronic to have posted on /. and should be immediately taken down.
We’re looking at other things, probably a newer tablet
Yeah, uh, so when we start producing the new Edifi 2.0, it's going to be all new and shit.
Wake me when we have a working space elevator, so we can send these wackjobs to meet their god.
All this.
I've never personally signed up for cable TV. My partner had it when we moved in together, but a few years ago we ditched that too. I'd like to say that, if we were in the U.S., we might get by with Hulu and Netflix, but up here in Canada the pickings are very slim, and iTunes rentals don't play nice with XBMC, so I just leech everything off of Usenet and/or torrents. It's not that we can't afford those services, but the content we want simply isn't on offer, thanks to moronic regional licensing bullshit.
I did the whole free-to-air pirate satellite thing for a few months. That sucked. The best part was the 25 channels of 24/7 porn - dead serious. That "paid programming" shit was all over the grid. I think they had a dozen different infomercials featuring the same get-rich-quick guy, 24/7. And the nature of satellite PPV meant that each movie had 10 channels with staggered start times. Convenient, I guess, but across all 500 or so channels, you had maybe 200 hours of non-repeat programming per week. Even at $0 a month, I tired of it very quickly and sold off my dish and receiver less than 3 months later.
Today, the only wires entering my home are for internet and power. The only thing I miss are live sports, on those rare occasions when I'd be inclined to watch (playoffs, mostly). Solution: go to a pub with the guys, have some beers, eat some wings, watch on the big screen, no monthly subscription required.
The difference here is that Viacom does not own DirecTV. These so-called content owners pull the same bundling bullshit on distributors, which is another reason why unbundling should be mandated by law. Why should DirecTV have to carry (and pay for) a pile of shitty channels, just to get the one their customers actually want ?
Yes, consumers are ignorant and too lazy to stick to their guns, but the problem doesn't magically stop at the distributor's head-end. It's a dirty industry from top to bottom.
I agree with the past four or five administrations' policies. Anything that results in the collapse of New Rome can only be a good thing, for all but the uber-rich-uber-useless fascist elite. Good for the common American, good for everyone else on this planet who is sick of wars for profit and the negative-value media endemic to U.S. corporate lobbying.
Au contraire, mon troll.
I read about these things, I've experimented with a lot of them, because I've been a coder since diapers. This is what I do for fun, oddly enough. I've read about and toyed with closures until it "clicked", but even then I still couldn't find a legitimate use for them. Sure, there were a few "hey I could pull this stunt" moments, but it was nothing more than a cheap hack, in lieu of a slightly more laborious but classically understood approach.
If there is a common problem that is elegantly and optimally solved by closures, I have yet to encounter it. Unless that problem is having too many spare CPU cycles and not enough recursive stack frames.
<sarcasm>Because bike helmets are ULTRA GAAAAAAY.</sarcasm>
The helmet does fuckall, that's why. It's a great cash cow for helmet manufacturers, but unless you're a competitive racer, the helmet is really useless. It does not offer any protection in the most common types of accidents seen in urban settings: sideswipes and t-bones. It also doesn't account for the fact that the great majority of urban cyclists are morons, completely oblivious to their surroundings and not in control of their bike. In other words, they ride the same way they drive their car. Helmets don't protect you from your own stupidity.
Not too long ago, some guy died by smashing into a light pole, instantly crushing his neck. What was he doing riding at high speed on the sidewalk ? Being a moron, that's what.
From TFA itself:
W3Schools is a website for people with an interest for web technologies. These people are more interested in using alternative browsers than the average user. The average user tends to the browser that comes preinstalled with their computer, and do not seek out other browser alternatives.
These facts indicate that the browser figures above are not 100% realistic. Other web sites have statistics showing that Internet Explorer is a more popular browser.
Glitch0, please submit your résumé to CNN. They greatly value your kind of selective reading skills.