My boss has, but he sucks at it. He doesn't know much about computers. I think he may be retarded. I hope he is. That means I can spend more time on Slashdot screwing with his mind.
Most likely it would mean that a given format would not be recommended in the next standard. A couple of things on that point though...
1) Specific image types aren't really recommended one way or another: Graphics on the Web
2) The <img> tag is possibly going away in XHTML 2.0 and would be replaced by <object>. This makes the point even more moot, as <object> is pretty damn broad.
3) The real question is of browser support. I think we can all agree that Mozilla won't drop GIF support for quite awhile and IE probably never will. Hell, IE doesn't even support PNG properly.
But surely you can appreciate the desire to fire up vi or whatever and manipulate your code by hand, right? It's not that you nesscessarily need or want to, but the option of coding by hand (from scratch or just to make an adjustment) is nice and reassuring. In some ways it's analogous Open Source software and being able to "work under the hood" if you so desire or need.
Besides, then you lose your bragging rights to "I actually bothered to make my homepage XHTML 1.1 and CSS2-compliant by hand!";-)
Re:X (and other Window systems) reduce productivit
on
Who Needs XFree86?
·
· Score: 1
It usually shows in the lower left corner. The format is "59,6", where 59 is the row and 6 is the column. You can use nG or:n (where n in the line number) to jump to a certain line.
Something else I'd like to see is someone reposting the "mysterious future" articles somewhere else. That way everyone could get them for free. Why should Slashdot be able to extort money out of people to get something in advance? Especially when there's a question of inadequate bandwidth, e.g. slashdotting. I say fuck 'em. Put those articles on BitTorrent. Ruin this plum for subscribers, because we deserve that service without paying!
P.S. Yes, this is sarcasm. I just can't help noticing the irony.
I couldn't agree more. I was thinking about upgrading several major parts of my system. Instead, I bought a 19-inch LCD (ViewSonic VG191). It was the best upgrade I have ever done. More than anything else, it has changed my mindset towards my system (went from "love" to "worship"). A good and large LCD monitor, coupled with a nice video card that does DVI, is beautiful and will enhance everything you do. My subsequent upgrade, going from an AMD T-bird 1200 to a XP 2100+ was disappointing when compared to the monitor.
Ok, well I have to admit that I thought that it was 70mm that had the insane resolution that would be good for HDTV conversion. Didn't realize 35mm was so high. So, that leads me to two questions:
First, what's the point of progressive scan DVD players? Obviously when coupled with a HDTV, they give a slightly better picture than the regular DVD/TV combo. However, I figured that that was the best DVD could do from normal film (35mm). If the DVD format is the problem, then doesn't that mean that progressive scan is a bit of a waste of money?
Second, shouldn't TV shows that are put on DVD look super-bad ass? I assume they're filmed on something akin to 35mm. I bought my girlfriend the first three seasons of Friends on DVD. Watching them on my progressive scan player and HDTV, they don't seem to be any better than normal TV, except that there's never any fuzz (my cable gets crazy from time-to-time). It doesn't look as good as X-Men, for example. Thanks.
Ok, so the article says that they're going to offer T2 in "2.35:1 anamorphic widescreen transfer digitally mastered from a brand-new 1080p, 24sf high-definition digital telecine transfer." That's great and all, but how are they getting this quality? Was T2 filmed in digital? I thought something had to be filmed in the 1080p HDTV-quality to have that kind of picture. Can anyone shed some light, or are they blowing sunshine up our collective asses? Thanks.
I never said which was more important. The early ISO's were the deciding factor. They weren't the only factor, but they happened to push me off the fence towards buying.
Thanks. I'm not really all that upset about myself, though. I just think it was a shitty thing for Slashdot to do to Red Hat (and I wanted to be the first kid on the block with RH9!).
No, it is altruistic. I'm not pissed that some people got something for free that I paid for so much (it was bound to happen). I'm pissed that Slashdot (via Jamie) helped destroy a value-added service of an Open Source company (and something cool that I was looking forward to). I was also planning to purchase a Slashdot subscription this week because I love the site, not because the ads bother me (I use Ad Muncher). Now I'm too pissed. Hey, Jamie - I'm taking revenue from you!
..gonna remind us how we can fuck Red Hat & get it a week early without paying? I especially liked seeing that 3 days after I purchased a RHN account with that as a major factor & to support Red Hat. Fuck you, Jamie.
First, Red Hat got caught with their pants down & didn't anticiate just how much load they'd be getting. Also, they didn't help matter by putting the ISO's up at like 9 am or something. If they'd done it at midnight, then some of us who stayed up could have beat the corporate gang before they got to work in the morning & everyone would have better off. BTW, it took me from 9 am until 2 am to get mine from them.
Second, if Red Hat wants to distribute via P2P, especially once the ISO's are wide-released, I'm all for it. What I am not for is people getting for free what I have paid for and Slashdot encouraging people to rip off an Open Source company.
Actually, I consider it to be an important benefit. And, hey, thanks for deciding what's important to me. I paid for something. You didn't. I have less money for no good reason, then. That's how it hurt me. In the future, I may not give that money to Red Hat again if I think I don't need to. That's how it hurts them. How hard is this for you? You want a drawing in crayon???
The ISO images that Red Hat gives out are PROPRIETARY. Look up the word if you can't wrap your head around that concept. Red Hat has no obligation to give them away, only source & certainly not even that in ISO form. If they don't have to give it away, or even distribute it (after all, they could make CD's & then toss them in the ocean), then why do you think that you deserve them a week early? I think you understand perfectly well that if everyone can get it for free, then no one will pay in the future for this value-added service. Go back to your parent's basement, Troll.
Evidently RedHat is unwilling to provide sufficient bandwidth to serve their paying subscribers in a timely manner, so it seems to me that they would welcome alternative methods of distributing the new ISOs.
Ok, that was a bit of a problem today, but isn't that Red Hat's problem to solve? If I pay Red Hat for a service, and they're not doing it as well as I would like, then they need to fix it. What you're suggesting is like saying that Microsoft sold me an Office CD, but it had scratches. In fact, a lot of people received scratched CD's. Since MS is going to mail us new CD's & it takes awhile, some people who got unscratched CD's will burn copies for the entire town. See, Microsoft had a problem with their distribution. These kind souls are going to help them. Microsoft should "welcome alternative methods of distributing the new" CD's. How long do you think they'd be in jail?
For those who aren't paying subscribers, the only problem for RedHat is that they're getting the ISOs sooner than other non-paying folks. This may irritate those who did pay, but how, except in the most abstract sense, does this hurt them?
Did you even fucking read that after you wrote it? Seriously! If Red Hat's selling me a service, and others are getting it for free... I would pay for it, why? It's not a business model problem, it's certain shitheads ruining it for everyone else. It's the cocksuckers who want to take & take, but never want to give back. I've seen lots of Red Hat boxed sets, so I don't know where you got that idea, hell, they even sell them in their online store.
The biggest problem of all, though, isn't the fact that it got loaded on BitTorrent, beacuse that's going to happen either way. The problem is that Jamie acted like a shithead by posting this fucked-up article. While he could have either not posted it or waited until next week to do it (when the FTP servers would have been slammed also) or related it to the new Mandrake ISO's, Jamie instead chose to fuck over Red Hat for no good reason at all.
Look, the fact of the matter is that Red Hat was creating a value-added service. As others have noted above, they're only required to provide access to the source, nothing more. The fact that they distribute ISO's is a kindness to the community. I started a Red Hat Network subscription last week for three reasons: to get the general RHN services, to support Red Hat and the work they do, and to get my ISO's early.
Now if I turn around and distribute them via P2P or BitTorrent (or anyone else does), I have no problem with that at all. That's the nature of the beast & perfectly legal, AFAIK. What I do have a problem with is Jaime posting this bullshit. Here's the problems:
1) This is a P2P story. It doesn't have shit to do with Red Hat, except that they're the ones getting fucked. Wrong category.
2) The tone of the story is "sticking-it-to-the-man". While, I understand frustrations of that nature when we're talking about the shitheads at the RIAA or MPAA, what's Red Hat done wrong here? Come up with an innovative value-added service for paying members of the community? How Fucking Dare They!!!
3) By Jamie posting this trash, Slashdot is engaging in the sort of shit-where-you-sleep behavior that we've come to expect from big corporations, not members and supporters of the Open Source community versus each other. If the point was to highlight BitTorrent, fine - post it as a P2P article and show how we can all download the newest Mandrake ISO's that just came out quickly. Instead we got, "Red Hat won't let us have it for a week without paying! Fuck 'em!"
4) I am now pissed about the fact that I paid all that money for something that had a major incentive destroyed. Not pissed enough to wish I hadn't done it, and certainly not pissed at Red Hat. But what do you think Red Hat's response will be to the paying customers who do complain to them? It'll be either: tough shit/we're getting rid of it, we're going to come up with some kinda product activation, or we're going to give ISO's to only the paying members and source to anyone else. None of these except the second would solve this problem, but all would suck.
We all laughed about the 1)Open Source 2)??? 3)Profit! jokes for quite a while. Red Hat is one of the few companies out there making it work & coming up with new ways to make it work. Slashdot destroyed a piece of that today in a rather childish way. Thanks!
I spent two years stationed at Quantico as a Tech and the printers that would come into our shop from TBS (The Basic School) were the worst. I swear those motherfuckers were using their HP Laserjet 4's as wheel chocks for their Humvee's. They were always filled with sand & one time I found a huge-ass spider nest above the fuser! "Shit, Devildog, I don't know what's wrong with it.":-D
...for all five CD's. And while I may not be downloading them every month, I usually switch to a different distro on one of my machines evry 2-3 months & they're the latest version (final or beta). This basically means that I would be going over my limit every other month just from distro downloads! What about the rest of my stuff that I do on the Net? This has nothing to do with piracy. Is it a sizeable contirbuting factor? Sure. But this will stifle students desires to go nuts over a braodband connection - a bad thing by anyone's standards.
And who says they're not for entertainment? Students need to unwind, too. Most schools force freshman to live in dorms. Other students can't afford anything other than the dorms. Are they not allowed to kick back & play a little BF1942 or something after a long day? Have you seen the tuition bill for Cornell? This is most likely an attempt to pass the buck for over-paying on bandwidth by the school.
Yes, sorry for the ambiguity. That's what I meant; no one can personally buy a second level domain. Which I understand the reasoning, but it's still a little disappointing.:-)
The current scheme appears to be that they aren't selling domains, per se. After visting the link (which gives you a list of registrars), I found that no one will sell me "kikta.name". However, all seem to let you buy something in the form of "jason.kikta.name" (which comes with an email address of "jason@kikta.name"). So they're not really selling personal domains, just "firstname.lastname.name". If anyone can find anything different, please say so, but I tried 5 of them before I gave up.
FYI, "scream.my.name", "whats.my.name", and "say.my.name" are all taken already.;-)
FreeBSD is not Linux. They are two different things. I'm not really sure what the point of your comment is. "...barred from committing any changes to the FreeBSD kernel" means that he can't make changes to the official version on his own. He would have to send his changes to someone still on the team & have them approve it & add it. Just like the average joe programmer looking to help out.
Imagine if this SQL worm spread really slowly and randomly modified the SQL database. If it wasn't detected for ages, yet had slowly deteriated the database over a matter of months hence rendering backups next to worthless.
In that case, I believe the correct term is Service Pack.;-)
The problem is there appears to be more interest in the Free Beer aspect of Linux versus Freedom.
I think you're right on this point. This is where we as a community need to point out in our advocacy that the Freedom aspect is what puts Linux ahead of the crowd. Quite honestly, I'm willing to bet there are a lot of us who wouldn't want to (or don't - I got mine from MS, since I'm in college) pay for Windows, except for the fact that most people have it & we need it for our work and games.
I would, OTOH, be willing to pay for Linux, even if that was the only option, because of the quality. I think we need to make it clear to people that the Free Beer is just icing on the cake compared to the Freedom, which drives every single other advantage it has.
...but who decides what? Anything that a registrar decides will be subject to lawsuit, especially if it is not the result of a law, but their own policy. Furthermore, some sites that are borderline will object to their classification.
Your intentions are noble, but I think implementation will be impractical. Besides, most of us can agree that a lot of parents would rather have little Johnny looking at pussy than a hate site.
Slashdot Mirror
My boss has, but he sucks at it. He doesn't know much about computers. I think he may be retarded. I hope he is. That means I can spend more time on Slashdot screwing with his mind.
Call me wacky, but maybe that's because CSS3 is still under development.
Most likely it would mean that a given format would not be recommended in the next standard. A couple of things on that point though...
1) Specific image types aren't really recommended one way or another: Graphics on the Web
2) The <img> tag is possibly going away in XHTML 2.0 and would be replaced by <object>. This makes the point even more moot, as <object> is pretty damn broad.
3) The real question is of browser support. I think we can all agree that Mozilla won't drop GIF support for quite awhile and IE probably never will. Hell, IE doesn't even support PNG properly.
But surely you can appreciate the desire to fire up vi or whatever and manipulate your code by hand, right? It's not that you nesscessarily need or want to, but the option of coding by hand (from scratch or just to make an adjustment) is nice and reassuring. In some ways it's analogous Open Source software and being able to "work under the hood" if you so desire or need.
;-)
Besides, then you lose your bragging rights to "I actually bothered to make my homepage XHTML 1.1 and CSS2-compliant by hand!"
It usually shows in the lower left corner. The format is "59,6", where 59 is the row and 6 is the column. You can use nG or :n (where n in the line number) to jump to a certain line.
Something else I'd like to see is someone reposting the "mysterious future" articles somewhere else. That way everyone could get them for free. Why should Slashdot be able to extort money out of people to get something in advance? Especially when there's a question of inadequate bandwidth, e.g. slashdotting. I say fuck 'em. Put those articles on BitTorrent. Ruin this plum for subscribers, because we deserve that service without paying!
P.S. Yes, this is sarcasm. I just can't help noticing the irony.
I couldn't agree more. I was thinking about upgrading several major parts of my system. Instead, I bought a 19-inch LCD (ViewSonic VG191). It was the best upgrade I have ever done. More than anything else, it has changed my mindset towards my system (went from "love" to "worship"). A good and large LCD monitor, coupled with a nice video card that does DVI, is beautiful and will enhance everything you do. My subsequent upgrade, going from an AMD T-bird 1200 to a XP 2100+ was disappointing when compared to the monitor.
P.S. Compaq sucks, too.
Ok, well I have to admit that I thought that it was 70mm that had the insane resolution that would be good for HDTV conversion. Didn't realize 35mm was so high. So, that leads me to two questions:
First, what's the point of progressive scan DVD players? Obviously when coupled with a HDTV, they give a slightly better picture than the regular DVD/TV combo. However, I figured that that was the best DVD could do from normal film (35mm). If the DVD format is the problem, then doesn't that mean that progressive scan is a bit of a waste of money?
Second, shouldn't TV shows that are put on DVD look super-bad ass? I assume they're filmed on something akin to 35mm. I bought my girlfriend the first three seasons of Friends on DVD. Watching them on my progressive scan player and HDTV, they don't seem to be any better than normal TV, except that there's never any fuzz (my cable gets crazy from time-to-time). It doesn't look as good as X-Men, for example. Thanks.
Ok, so the article says that they're going to offer T2 in "2.35:1 anamorphic widescreen transfer digitally mastered from a brand-new 1080p, 24sf high-definition digital telecine transfer." That's great and all, but how are they getting this quality? Was T2 filmed in digital? I thought something had to be filmed in the 1080p HDTV-quality to have that kind of picture. Can anyone shed some light, or are they blowing sunshine up our collective asses? Thanks.
I never said which was more important. The early ISO's were the deciding factor. They weren't the only factor, but they happened to push me off the fence towards buying.
Thanks. I'm not really all that upset about myself, though. I just think it was a shitty thing for Slashdot to do to Red Hat (and I wanted to be the first kid on the block with RH9!).
No, it is altruistic. I'm not pissed that some people got something for free that I paid for so much (it was bound to happen). I'm pissed that Slashdot (via Jamie) helped destroy a value-added service of an Open Source company (and something cool that I was looking forward to). I was also planning to purchase a Slashdot subscription this week because I love the site, not because the ads bother me (I use Ad Muncher). Now I'm too pissed. Hey, Jamie - I'm taking revenue from you!
..gonna remind us how we can fuck Red Hat & get it a week early without paying? I especially liked seeing that 3 days after I purchased a RHN account with that as a major factor & to support Red Hat. Fuck you, Jamie.
I'm at the karma cap. Do what you must..
I think the problem here was twofold:
First, Red Hat got caught with their pants down & didn't anticiate just how much load they'd be getting. Also, they didn't help matter by putting the ISO's up at like 9 am or something. If they'd done it at midnight, then some of us who stayed up could have beat the corporate gang before they got to work in the morning & everyone would have better off. BTW, it took me from 9 am until 2 am to get mine from them.
Second, if Red Hat wants to distribute via P2P, especially once the ISO's are wide-released, I'm all for it. What I am not for is people getting for free what I have paid for and Slashdot encouraging people to rip off an Open Source company.
Actually, I consider it to be an important benefit. And, hey, thanks for deciding what's important to me. I paid for something. You didn't. I have less money for no good reason, then. That's how it hurt me. In the future, I may not give that money to Red Hat again if I think I don't need to. That's how it hurts them. How hard is this for you? You want a drawing in crayon???
The ISO images that Red Hat gives out are PROPRIETARY. Look up the word if you can't wrap your head around that concept. Red Hat has no obligation to give them away, only source & certainly not even that in ISO form. If they don't have to give it away, or even distribute it (after all, they could make CD's & then toss them in the ocean), then why do you think that you deserve them a week early? I think you understand perfectly well that if everyone can get it for free, then no one will pay in the future for this value-added service. Go back to your parent's basement, Troll.
Ok, that was a bit of a problem today, but isn't that Red Hat's problem to solve? If I pay Red Hat for a service, and they're not doing it as well as I would like, then they need to fix it. What you're suggesting is like saying that Microsoft sold me an Office CD, but it had scratches. In fact, a lot of people received scratched CD's. Since MS is going to mail us new CD's & it takes awhile, some people who got unscratched CD's will burn copies for the entire town. See, Microsoft had a problem with their distribution. These kind souls are going to help them. Microsoft should "welcome alternative methods of distributing the new" CD's. How long do you think they'd be in jail?
Did you even fucking read that after you wrote it? Seriously! If Red Hat's selling me a service, and others are getting it for free... I would pay for it, why? It's not a business model problem, it's certain shitheads ruining it for everyone else. It's the cocksuckers who want to take & take, but never want to give back. I've seen lots of Red Hat boxed sets, so I don't know where you got that idea, hell, they even sell them in their online store.
The biggest problem of all, though, isn't the fact that it got loaded on BitTorrent, beacuse that's going to happen either way. The problem is that Jamie acted like a shithead by posting this fucked-up article. While he could have either not posted it or waited until next week to do it (when the FTP servers would have been slammed also) or related it to the new Mandrake ISO's, Jamie instead chose to fuck over Red Hat for no good reason at all.
Look, the fact of the matter is that Red Hat was creating a value-added service. As others have noted above, they're only required to provide access to the source, nothing more. The fact that they distribute ISO's is a kindness to the community. I started a Red Hat Network subscription last week for three reasons: to get the general RHN services, to support Red Hat and the work they do, and to get my ISO's early.
Now if I turn around and distribute them via P2P or BitTorrent (or anyone else does), I have no problem with that at all. That's the nature of the beast & perfectly legal, AFAIK. What I do have a problem with is Jaime posting this bullshit. Here's the problems:
1) This is a P2P story. It doesn't have shit to do with Red Hat, except that they're the ones getting fucked. Wrong category.
2) The tone of the story is "sticking-it-to-the-man". While, I understand frustrations of that nature when we're talking about the shitheads at the RIAA or MPAA, what's Red Hat done wrong here? Come up with an innovative value-added service for paying members of the community? How Fucking Dare They!!!
3) By Jamie posting this trash, Slashdot is engaging in the sort of shit-where-you-sleep behavior that we've come to expect from big corporations, not members and supporters of the Open Source community versus each other. If the point was to highlight BitTorrent, fine - post it as a P2P article and show how we can all download the newest Mandrake ISO's that just came out quickly. Instead we got, "Red Hat won't let us have it for a week without paying! Fuck 'em!"
4) I am now pissed about the fact that I paid all that money for something that had a major incentive destroyed. Not pissed enough to wish I hadn't done it, and certainly not pissed at Red Hat. But what do you think Red Hat's response will be to the paying customers who do complain to them? It'll be either: tough shit/we're getting rid of it, we're going to come up with some kinda product activation, or we're going to give ISO's to only the paying members and source to anyone else. None of these except the second would solve this problem, but all would suck.
We all laughed about the 1)Open Source 2)??? 3)Profit! jokes for quite a while. Red Hat is one of the few companies out there making it work & coming up with new ways to make it work. Slashdot destroyed a piece of that today in a rather childish way. Thanks!
I spent two years stationed at Quantico as a Tech and the printers that would come into our shop from TBS (The Basic School) were the worst. I swear those motherfuckers were using their HP Laserjet 4's as wheel chocks for their Humvee's. They were always filled with sand & one time I found a huge-ass spider nest above the fuser! "Shit, Devildog, I don't know what's wrong with it." :-D
...for all five CD's. And while I may not be downloading them every month, I usually switch to a different distro on one of my machines evry 2-3 months & they're the latest version (final or beta). This basically means that I would be going over my limit every other month just from distro downloads! What about the rest of my stuff that I do on the Net? This has nothing to do with piracy. Is it a sizeable contirbuting factor? Sure. But this will stifle students desires to go nuts over a braodband connection - a bad thing by anyone's standards.
And who says they're not for entertainment? Students need to unwind, too. Most schools force freshman to live in dorms. Other students can't afford anything other than the dorms. Are they not allowed to kick back & play a little BF1942 or something after a long day? Have you seen the tuition bill for Cornell? This is most likely an attempt to pass the buck for over-paying on bandwidth by the school.
Yes, sorry for the ambiguity. That's what I meant; no one can personally buy a second level domain. Which I understand the reasoning, but it's still a little disappointing. :-)
The current scheme appears to be that they aren't selling domains, per se. After visting the link (which gives you a list of registrars), I found that no one will sell me "kikta.name". However, all seem to let you buy something in the form of "jason.kikta.name" (which comes with an email address of "jason@kikta.name"). So they're not really selling personal domains, just "firstname.lastname.name". If anyone can find anything different, please say so, but I tried 5 of them before I gave up.
;-)
FYI, "scream.my.name", "whats.my.name", and "say.my.name" are all taken already.
FreeBSD is not Linux. They are two different things. I'm not really sure what the point of your comment is. "...barred from committing any changes to the FreeBSD kernel" means that he can't make changes to the official version on his own. He would have to send his changes to someone still on the team & have them approve it & add it. Just like the average joe programmer looking to help out.
In that case, I believe the correct term is Service Pack.
I think you're right on this point. This is where we as a community need to point out in our advocacy that the Freedom aspect is what puts Linux ahead of the crowd. Quite honestly, I'm willing to bet there are a lot of us who wouldn't want to (or don't - I got mine from MS, since I'm in college) pay for Windows, except for the fact that most people have it & we need it for our work and games.
I would, OTOH, be willing to pay for Linux, even if that was the only option, because of the quality. I think we need to make it clear to people that the Free Beer is just icing on the cake compared to the Freedom, which drives every single other advantage it has.
...but who decides what? Anything that a registrar decides will be subject to lawsuit, especially if it is not the result of a law, but their own policy. Furthermore, some sites that are borderline will object to their classification.
Your intentions are noble, but I think implementation will be impractical. Besides, most of us can agree that a lot of parents would rather have little Johnny looking at pussy than a hate site.