the ownership of rdb is not completely irrelevant. as the original publisher, rdb has the right to later apply for a patent on the material they published. and oracle, as the owner of the company, would presumably have a right to do so "on their behalf".
if i publish something new today, and five other people publish the same thing two weeks from now, i can still apply for the patent six months from now, even though other people have already published 'prior art'.
in this case however, i would expect this to be a non-issue. the time window to do such a thing is reasnbly short (i believe a year or so) and the prior art in question was published in 1991. oracle, whether they owned rdb or not, did not file for the patent until 1998
i think the highlights of last years game were the mountain dew commercials. they didn't have any this year (pepsi sponsored the game, i take it) but i saw a mountain dew commercial involving a spaceship after the game that was probably the best commercial i've seen since last superbowl.
unfortunately i can't describe it any where near well enough to do it justice.
they're both worthless...
on
CS vs CIS
·
· Score: 1
...if you don't put time into what you do.
i just finished my degree in computer engineering, and very little of what i learned after my sophomore year was in class. if you're not willing to put the work in to learn stuff on your own, than neither degree is going to do you any good. a good CS program (or CIS i imagine) is going to be pretty heavy in theory. if you don't take this stuff and play around with it on your own and get into it outside of class, then you shouldn't be in college. just go to a trade school or something and get an mcse or oracle certifiactaion or whatever.
personally, i think if you think you can handle the math, i would do the cs. there is some personal reward, i think, for getting through the harder classes. as i mentioned earlier, i just graduated with a computer engineering degree, and although i tended to do poorly in my electrical engineering classes (the biggest difference between cs and cpe at our school) i'm glad i took them, and i don't regret the extra work, or the hit in my gpa that i took to get through them.
apparently no one else here has mentioned it, but Ogg Vorbis already has a 'Big Daddy'
somebody already mentioned Xiphophorus corporation, although that is little more than a name used by the author. more importantly, the author is a paid developer of IceCast, a company that has a strong interest in a truly free audio compression codec, as they are working on their own streaming media projects, which they would like to be able to do without paying royalties to Fraunhauffer. part if the reason for his employment there is specifically that they have lawyers on the payroll specifically to look into the patent and licensing issues with Ogg Vorbis.
Haven't yet met a truly tolerant Christian. ( Not that there aren't
any, just never met one..)
i would bet that you have. there are a lot of christians out there that don't spell it out to the world in big bold letters that they are christian. most of my friends probably don't realize that im christian. i don't try to hide it, i just don't bring up the subject unless somebody asks me. (and i imagine if you were my friend you would never ask me if i was a christian in between games of d&d)
and anyway, now that i think about it, i would say that jesus christ himself was the perfect example of a tolerant christian, as were most of the early disciples. read the bible if you don't believe me. fascinating stuff, even if you don't believe in it.
One of my less pleasant chores when I was young was to read the Bible
from one end to the other. Reading the Bible straight through is at
least 70 percent discipline, like learning Latin. But the good parts
are, of course, simply amazing. God is an extremely uneven writer, but
when He's good, nobody can touch Him.
-- John Gardner, NYT Book Review, Jan 1983
every one of your comments regarding the windows start menu is completely or partially incorrect...
1) they reserve the top level for, basically advertisements. (AIM launcher, Netscape SmartUpdate, New Office Document - why the hell can't I put my own things there?
you can put your own things there. the same way you put things anywhere else in your start menu. and if you want, youcan deleteall of the advertisements too.
2) Then the lower levels, are not easily accessible, unless you open Expolorer, separately, and drill down through obscure hierarchies to where your profile's menu folder is.
right click onyou start button and hit explore. you will suddenly be taken to "where your profile's menu folder is"
. while you're there, drop an app or two in the top level of your start folder.
3) And you cannot control sorting (as you CAN in Apple Menu). while this is a valid criticism of windows 95, that is not true inany more recent version of windows (that i've used anyway. they fixed this in 98, i don't see why they would revert to an unsorted menu in later versions)
i can't give a good comparison to ns6 or mozilla, because i haven't used either one much. one thing that ido like about konqueror compared to mozilla is that the right click popup menus actually work right. (i.e. you dont have to click-release, select your menu item, and then click-release again) regardless of any other improvements is enough to keep me from using mozilla. (anyone know if that ever got fixed? last i checked they had decided they weren't going to fix it anytime soon, even though it was there most requested bug and was originally scheduled to be fixed by M14)
first impression of konqueror. despitewhat anyone else may tell you, you realistically need to run kde for it to work well. if you're not running kde it's slow to start up, because it has to go through all of the kdeinit stuff that normally happens when you start you x session. it also seems to suffer a little in terms of stability, although that may be my imagination. and most annoyingly, if you try to use it with gnome, you will get error popups every few minutes because it won't acknowledge the session-manager. so, in this users opinion, its not worth it if you can't use kde as a whole.
i can't say much for javascript support, because i stopped writing it a long time ago, and i don't view pages that use it much. however, until i can get gnome working on my box again, i'll be stuck in kde, and i have taken to using konqueror asmy full-time browser, over netscape navigator 4.7. in comparison to ns47, im completely happy with it. it's at least as fast, and i have noticed zero problems that in rendering the sites i visit appropriately. it does however do the old ie trick of rendering the page as it downloads, so anytime you view a page with a lot of tables, you're likely to see alot of jittering around and reshuffling until the page is done.
in conclusion, i can't give a solid comparison to any recent mozilla, but konqeror is on par with or ahead of anything else i've used (including ie, i would say, although i dont use it much anymore either), so long as you can live with the limitations of the kde environment.
The most cheesiest lesson learned in this election is that "Every Vote counts." Wrong. The only locality where
one vote makes a difference is in Florida. Even there, its not clear that the votes in Palm Beach will count...
this is very certainly true. and it's a good thing that all of those voters in florida knew that the election was going to come down to their state, so they all went out and voted.
what a crock of shit. this time it was florida. next time maybe it will be virginia. you have know way of knowing when you cast your vote whether the election will be decided by your state or not. so yes, your vote does count. maybe it didn't make a big difference today, but who is to say it won't in the next election. or the one after that. or....
it was somewhat different in that case, because Perot, while he had different opinions than either of the candidates, was still fairly close to the center politically. most political scientists believe that perot attracted a roughly equal number of supporters from both parties (recall clinton won in '92 with something like 43% of the popular vote). Given Nader's very liberal views, I think it is safe to say, despite the numerous ranting and raving Nader fans on slashdot saying that there is no difference between Bush and Gore, that a significant majority of people who voted for Nader would have preferred a Gore presidency to a Bush presidency.
That being said, every one of them knew that by voting for Nader, they were contributing to this possibility, and they still voted for him...
that's funny. last time i looked at the count (about 3 A.M.) Bush was ahead by about 200,000 votes. Granted 200,000 is chump change considering they both had over 45,000,000.
oops. i just looked at cnn. appears gore is leading after all. nevermind.
Not that it matters. anyone who has taken a high school (or even grade school) level class on american government knows that this wouldn't be the first time apresident has won theelectoral vote without the popular vote. I don't see this spelling an end to the electoral college any time soon. It's been within our power to change it for some time, and I honestly don't see why it would change now over an election decided by less than one state's electoral vote and about 0.3% of the popular vote.
the rpm package format changed from 3.0 to 4.0, (hence the change in major version number) and all of the rpm-4.0 packages that i have found are in rpm-4.0 format. so how to upgrade it?
hmmm.... seems we have a problem here, doesn't it... --
i would like to know where you get the idea that mandrake releases anywhere near that often. are you counting their beta releases? i have been using mandrake 7.1 since at least june when i upgraded from 7.0. im pretty sure it's been out since the middle of may. funny i never heard about the five differnt releases they made between 7.1 and 7.2
<Sarcasm off>
seriously, though, the mandrake folks make a release more or less every six months, which is pretty close to the release schedule of the other major distributions. the notable exception to this, of course, is debian, which seems to manage to get a new release out the door once every other year or so. (no wonder debian users are so enthralled with "apt-get update". i would be too if i had to wait that long for my distro to come out with a new release)
as far as upgrading mandrake, you have a couple of options:
1) MandrakeUpdate. this seems like some sort of apt-get thing i imagine (having never used either one) it automatically updates any updates for your installation. i have never used it, as i prefer to do my upgrading manually, so i have some control over what is happening. the one downfall of MandrakeUpdate is that it doesn't know how to handle non-mandrake updates. for example, if you have the helix-gnome mandrake packages installed, it will get quite confused, and probably wont work at all.
2. network update. radhat has for a long time had the ability to install/update via network (ftp/http/nfs) naturally, when mandrake branched off, they retained that capability. if you want to upgrade over the network, you just download the floppy image, boot up, and run the network update. it detects what packages you have installed and downloads/installs the updates.
3. download the RPMS. just decide what RPMS you want, download them yourself and do 'rpm -Uvh *.rpm'
4. download/buy the cd. download (or buy) the whole cd image, and run the update program from the cd. or the install program, if you want a clean slate.
all in all i have to say good job to the mandrake guys. 7.1 is i think the best linux distro i've ever tried, and i hope 7.2 will be as good. my only significant peeve with 7.1 that i can think of is the way the mangled netscape's key-bindings. i can understand them wanting to change the default bindings to be like the windows bindings ( i remember saying once upon a time that i was going to do that very thing myself) but they could have found a way to make that an option. and more importantly, they could have been consistent. why was alt-F remapped to ctrl-F, but alt-N was left unchanged? to me, this is far more confusing than the fact that the alt-* keybindings are inconsistent with most other apps and with netscape on windows. it seems like it would be easier to adjust to using alt-v for netscape instead of ctrl-v, than to figure out which commands were alt-* and which were ctrl-*. (iirc i think the commands in the File menu are alt-* and the rest are ctrl-*. even with a reason behind it, this still seems like a very arbitrary division) oh, well. just one of several reasons i never have (and never will) installed a netscape rpm. --
as a follow-up, i just went and poked around the site www.bettervote.com that somebody mentioned above. not a bad site, although their "patent pending better match" technology seems to put a definite liberal bias in the questions it asks, and the answers it allows.
anyway, after answering all of the questions that it asked, i ended up with a rating of between 50% and 60% for every single candidate except alan keyes. maybe it really doesn't matter who i vote for...
perhaps i'll throw a vote at the libertartians so they can get federal funds in the next election. i don't want one of them in charge, but i would like their opinions to get a little more recognition.
well, hopefully someone else will read this, since i don't have the automatic +1 bonus that everyone else here seems to.
two things here. first of all, where can i find out about the local races? anyone know. i haven't seen much coverage of them in the papers (then again i never read the papers all that closely) as many people have said, i'm likely to make a much bigger difference in the local votes, but i really don't know anything about the candidates. i registered to vote where i am going to college (chicago) because i plan to continue to live here after i graduate, but i have never followed the political climate here much.
as for the presidential race. well, for all i've thought about it, the only thing i've decided so far is that i won't vote for gore. so here's the rundown on what i think:
bush: i've always considered myslef a republican, although this will be the first election i will be voting in. part of that probably had to do with an extremely conservative upbringing. i've lost a lot of faith in the republican party over the last four years, but i still tend to identify more closely with the republicans than with the democrats. anyway, the only thing that i really dislike about bush is the republican ties to big business. i favor bush's position on the estate tax (despite david brin's social engineering rant), i like the idea of education reform (although i don't particularly like vouchers, even though i went to a private school), etc. about the only thing gore has going for him are better positions regarding health care and prescription drug benefits, but in either of those two cases, gore's behind nader (imo). so if it weren't for big business, i'd vote bush.
browne: while i applaud the libertarian ideal, and i like a ot of his views, he's also kinda scary. while i am a strong opponent of gun control, his solution is extreme: repeal all federal gun laws. excuse me, i kinda like the fact that convicted felons are not allowed to own a firearm and that fully automatic weapons cannot be owned without a special permit. likewise, his position regarding the environment: sell of government lands because private owners will be better stewards of land they have a vested interest in. his argument is convincing; the vast majority of all serious pollution is done by corporate stewards of privately owned land. but what does this mean for national parks? is browne going to sell off yellowstone and the grand canyon as well? can you imagine how much a developer would pay for yellowstone to build condos for billionaires? his argument is that interest groups that care about the environment enough will buy some of these areas of land in order to protect it, but how much money do these groups have compared to the value of the land?
which brings us to nader. to quote brin: "gadzooks!!'. this guys scary. seriously. about the only thing he's got going for him is his privacy policy and his stance opposing large corporations. i think i disagree with him on just about every other issue. except for the issues about which he doesn't say anything at all, which is a lot of them. he seems to be running entirely on his economic platform and ignoring just about everything else. actually i guess i can't say i disagree with him on everything. his health care reformideas sound good. i'm not sure i agree that weneed national health care, but if we're going to have a health care system, it might as well be done right.
so that leaves me with this. if i'm going to vote for a major party candidate, i'd much rather vote for bush. i have a feeling that this would do no good whatsoever. i haven't seen the polls lately, but considering chicago's reputation for being democratic, i'd guess gore has a pretty strong hold on the electoral vote in illionois. if i decide to vote for a third party candidate, i have a choice between opposing big government and opposing big business. while i dislike big government on principle, right now i consider big business to be a bigger threat to my personal freedom. if either bush or browne had nader's personal privacy stance as part of their platform, they'd get my vote. even more so if they had his attitude about consumer protection (although that's a bit much to ask, especially from bush). anyway, my big beef with browne is that he needs to realize that our society has changed a fair amount since the constitution was wrtten, and the federal government needs to have some central authority, as there are things in our society that cannot be effectively left to the states. i think he's right that the government has gotten way to big, (and i like the idea of no income tax...) but he wants to make it way too small.
well, you could possible try to do what my grandfather did with his farm. he sold it while he was still alive, to my father and his brothers. i don't know the exact details of the arrangement, but the did continue to live on the farm for a while afterward. by this point in time, my father's brothers did most of the work anyway (my father left the farm to become a teacher). i don't know any of the details of the arrangement, and my grandpa is still alive right now, so i don't know how well the arrangement will actually work out, but i would think they would at least get to keep the land, even if all the money my grandpa saved up gets taxed...
This talk about farmers & businessmen
makes no sense because the estate tax proposals have nothing to do with these warm, fuzzy characters. This is
about landed wealth & big business, not Jed with 500 acres in Iowa or Sue with her corner store in Boise.
both of your claims here are completely false.
1) estate taxes hit farm owners the hardest. if you don't believe me, you can look through the comments for several cases of farm and small business owners who have been hurt or nearly hurt by inheritance taxes. the problem is, that the assets that one inherently has when one owns a farm are almost invariable worth more than the minimum at which the estate tax kicks in full force. the problem is, unlike with the very rich people, all of these assets are physical, and the only way to pay the taxes on them is to sell them in order to convert physical assets to liquid cash. the heirs of bill gates wouldn't have it nearly so bad, as most of what thy would inherit would be liquid assets or assets that could easily be made liquid. and i know something about this from experience too. my grandfather decided to sell his entire farm to my father and his brothers in order to keep it from being taxed when they inherited it from them. i don't know how effective that will actually be, as i imagine now the money they payed him will be taxed instead, but at least they won't have to sell of the farm.
2) big business???? excuse me, could you please explain to me how in the world the estate tax has anything at all to do with big business? businesses don't die, and no one inherits anything from them. now you're just calling up one of the/. boogeymen to win the argument.
Imagine if the prayer in school decision had gone the OTHER way. Imagine if Microsoft goes to the Supreme
Court under Bush-appointed judges. Imagine rulings on the constitutionality of the DMCA!
hmm.... im imagining...
and you know what? i don't feel any safer in these cases with gore appointed judges than i do with bush appointed judges. contrary to mr. brin's comment regarding nader and the supreme court, the supreme court is one of the bigger reasons i'm interested in nader. in all of the cases likely headed towards the supreme court revolving about issues that matter to me, having a gore appointed judge in the supreme court doesn't make me feel any better than having a bush appointed judge in the supreme court
everything you say does not do a bit to show that gore is smarter than bush. i imagine the original poster has watched the debates as well.
when i watched the third debate, what i thought wsa not that bush was a blundering idiot. it was that gore is a far better public speaker than bush. i know that when i talk in front of a large group of people, i sound like a complete idiot. i'm not (i don't think, anyway) but i have no talent for public speaking. likewise my impression of georgebush is not that he's an idiot, but rather that he's not as good a public speaker as gore. maybe i just notice that because i've tried and failed to speak in public myself so many times.
anyway, it is a little unfair. your ability as a public speaker has little to nothing to do with how well you would do as president, but it has a big (possibly the biggest) influence on your chances of actually getting elected.
But anniversary of what? A WAG at the
date of a possibly mythological event? We NPPs would rather pick at it than celebrate it.
it's not a mythological event. jesus christ really was born, whether you believe in his religious teachings or not. (at least, i'm assuming he was really born. he was a real person, who actually lived, which of course would imply that he was born...)
if you were truly pedantic, you would instead point out that most historical scholars now believe that, if the accounts of his birth in the bible are reasonably accurate (wrt the taxation by caesar and who was governor and such) that christ was actually born about 5-6 BC, meaning that we actually missed the millenium five years ago. that, and the fact that he was most likely actually born in the spring, considering the accounts regarding the shepherds in the fields and such....
taco once said when he posted an article that he would rather vote for an inanimate carbon rod than for george bush. me, i decided basically the same thing about al gore a long time ago. something along the lines of "i don't care who the republicans put up for president, he'll get my vote over gore." then i get george bush. sheeshh....
i'm pretty sure i agree with malda about bush. not that that changes my opinion about gore any. right now i think i'd rather vote for an inanimate carbon rod than either of the primary candidates. too bad there isn't one running. that's why i'm looking at the other candidates. if i vote for nader, it's not because i think there's no real difference between the primary candidates, it's because i think they're both bad.
right now, i think i probably will vote for brown or nader. i don't seriously believe either one has a chance to get elected. but i also don't think i can stand to vote for either gore or bush. and i won't not vote like in the last election (not because i didn't care back then, but i had just turned 18 before the election and couldn't be bothered to register)
is it just me or does the so-called "worker shortage" keep coming up about once every two to three months.
at any rate, from my experience, the market seems to be flooded with techs and cs majors. what there seems to be a strong lack of is people with a clue. as cs degree by itself means nothing. i have seen way to many people who finish up a cs degree and still don't have a clue. but if you have a degree and a clue, and you can demonstrate that going into an interview, you'll do well. a little experience doesn't hurt either...
i've been in and out of the workforce for 2 years now, and i'm about done with my degree. a lot of the people i've worked with have not had degrees. if you're around competent and clueful people, you really can't tell a big difference between those who have degrees and those who don't. i have been able to tell a big difference between people who have taken at least 2 years of college and people who haven't. at any rate, having a clue is more important than having a degree. but you should still get the degree. it may not do you as much good as you like straight out of college, but (at least from what i've seen) it will be a good thing to have several years down the road, when you want to start moving up the ranks, and not get replaced by other hot shot new programmers.
note that these are only my observations. as i said, i've only been in the workforce for about two years, and i haven't quite got my degree yet, so my interpretation of the situation may be wrong.
yeah, it pointed to my real homepage on a server that no longer exists. someday i'll fix it. not like i had anything there anyway. unless you want to see my resume....
alright, the department of justice has as much reason as everyone else here does to want this review to be impartial. why? because the united states department of justice is not related to the united states court system. remember that whole three branches of government thing?
jump a few years ahead. the carnivore review was a wash. the doj have put their handy little sniffers in place, and actually manage to catch a two bit drug smuggler who wasn't smart enough to encrypt his email. he sues the doj based on the unconstitutionality of the carnivore device. the judge agrees.
oops. now doj is up a creek. carnivore has been declared unconstitutional and all of the work they put into it is for nothing. what's worse, they never got any big convictions out of it, and the one little two-bit smuggler they did catch gets off the hook. not to mention all of the bad publicity the doj gets.
if the carnivore system is going to get declared illegal or unconstitutional by a federal judge, it is in the doj's best interest for these lawyers to point that out now. because the doj can't do anything about a judges decision. they can do something about the decision of these reviewers: they can listen to what they say, and, if neccessary, change the implementation of carnivore so that it behaves within what is considered to be acceptable behavior for electronic surveillance. because not all electronic surveillance is unconstitutional. and if carnivore does violate our constitutional rights, the case will get thrown out of court the first time they try to use it.
Dont talk down to us, we probably know more than you do!
never assume you know more than anyone. you will tend to find yourself proved wrong quite often. in this case, you may know more about setting up a linux box, but i doubt you know more than he does about the issue in question: the legality of the carnivore system. he is one of the country's more respected lawyers in the field of law & technology.
After reading his evasive and non-responsive answers, its pretty obvious that Mr Perrit (or should I say " Mr Parrot ")
appears to be a shill, a disengenuous legal weasel, and is quite obviously comfortable at being kept firmly in the
government's pocket.
actually, it was quite obvious to me that his answers where non-substantive because the questions were non-substantive. how many forms of "why should we believe that your report is not going to be censored" and "is the doj reading your answers to this survey" do we need to subject the guy to. there were a few substanive questions that i would have liked a bit more substantial answers to, but for the most part, i thought dean perrit did a good job responding to our accusations.
everyone here apparently has already made up their mind that carnivore is illegal and will be abused and that no matter what the result if this review is, the government has a premade report ready that they will publish in place of the "independent review". at this point, why did we even bother asking him any questions?
Slashdot Mirror
the ownership of rdb is not completely irrelevant. as the original publisher, rdb has the right to later apply for a patent on the material they published. and oracle, as the owner of the company, would presumably have a right to do so "on their behalf".
if i publish something new today, and five other people publish the same thing two weeks from now, i can still apply for the patent six months from now, even though other people have already published 'prior art'.
in this case however, i would expect this to be a non-issue. the time window to do such a thing is reasnbly short (i believe a year or so) and the prior art in question was published in 1991. oracle, whether they owned rdb or not, did not file for the patent until 1998
i think the highlights of last years game were the mountain dew commercials. they didn't have any this year (pepsi sponsored the game, i take it) but i saw a mountain dew commercial involving a spaceship after the game that was probably the best commercial i've seen since last superbowl.
unfortunately i can't describe it any where near well enough to do it justice.
...if you don't put time into what you do.
i just finished my degree in computer engineering, and very little of what i learned after my sophomore year was in class. if you're not willing to put the work in to learn stuff on your own, than neither degree is going to do you any good. a good CS program (or CIS i imagine) is going to be pretty heavy in theory. if you don't take this stuff and play around with it on your own and get into it outside of class, then you shouldn't be in college. just go to a trade school or something and get an mcse or oracle certifiactaion or whatever.
personally, i think if you think you can handle the math, i would do the cs. there is some personal reward, i think, for getting through the harder classes. as i mentioned earlier, i just graduated with a computer engineering degree, and although i tended to do poorly in my electrical engineering classes (the biggest difference between cs and cpe at our school) i'm glad i took them, and i don't regret the extra work, or the hit in my gpa that i took to get through them.
apparently no one else here has mentioned it, but Ogg Vorbis already has a 'Big Daddy'
somebody already mentioned Xiphophorus corporation, although that is little more than a name used by the author. more importantly, the author is a paid developer of IceCast, a company that has a strong interest in a truly free audio compression codec, as they are working on their own streaming media projects, which they would like to be able to do without paying royalties to Fraunhauffer. part if the reason for his employment there is specifically that they have lawyers on the payroll specifically to look into the patent and licensing issues with Ogg Vorbis.
Haven't yet met a truly tolerant Christian. ( Not that there aren't any, just never met one..)
i would bet that you have. there are a lot of christians out there that don't spell it out to the world in big bold letters that they are christian. most of my friends probably don't realize that im christian. i don't try to hide it, i just don't bring up the subject unless somebody asks me. (and i imagine if you were my friend you would never ask me if i was a christian in between games of d&d)
and anyway, now that i think about it, i would say that jesus christ himself was the perfect example of a tolerant christian, as were most of the early disciples. read the bible if you don't believe me. fascinating stuff, even if you don't believe in it.
One of my less pleasant chores when I was young was to read the Bible from one end to the other. Reading the Bible straight through is at least 70 percent discipline, like learning Latin. But the good parts are, of course, simply amazing. God is an extremely uneven writer, but when He's good, nobody can touch Him.
-- John Gardner, NYT Book Review, Jan 1983
every one of your comments regarding the windows start menu is completely or partially incorrect...
1) they reserve the top level for, basically advertisements. (AIM launcher, Netscape SmartUpdate, New Office Document - why the hell can't I put my own things there?
you can put your own things there. the same way you put things anywhere else in your start menu. and if you want, youcan deleteall of the advertisements too.
2) Then the lower levels, are not easily accessible, unless you open Expolorer, separately, and drill down through obscure hierarchies to where your profile's menu folder is.
right click onyou start button and hit explore. you will suddenly be taken to "where your profile's menu folder is" . while you're there, drop an app or two in the top level of your start folder.
3) And you cannot control sorting (as you CAN in Apple Menu). while this is a valid criticism of windows 95, that is not true inany more recent version of windows (that i've used anyway. they fixed this in 98, i don't see why they would revert to an unsorted menu in later versions)
i can't give a good comparison to ns6 or mozilla, because i haven't used either one much. one thing that ido like about konqueror compared to mozilla is that the right click popup menus actually work right. (i.e. you dont have to click-release, select your menu item, and then click-release again) regardless of any other improvements is enough to keep me from using mozilla. (anyone know if that ever got fixed? last i checked they had decided they weren't going to fix it anytime soon, even though it was there most requested bug and was originally scheduled to be fixed by M14)
first impression of konqueror. despitewhat anyone else may tell you, you realistically need to run kde for it to work well. if you're not running kde it's slow to start up, because it has to go through all of the kdeinit stuff that normally happens when you start you x session. it also seems to suffer a little in terms of stability, although that may be my imagination. and most annoyingly, if you try to use it with gnome, you will get error popups every few minutes because it won't acknowledge the session-manager. so, in this users opinion, its not worth it if you can't use kde as a whole.
i can't say much for javascript support, because i stopped writing it a long time ago, and i don't view pages that use it much. however, until i can get gnome working on my box again, i'll be stuck in kde, and i have taken to using konqueror asmy full-time browser, over netscape navigator 4.7. in comparison to ns47, im completely happy with it. it's at least as fast, and i have noticed zero problems that in rendering the sites i visit appropriately. it does however do the old ie trick of rendering the page as it downloads, so anytime you view a page with a lot of tables, you're likely to see alot of jittering around and reshuffling until the page is done.
in conclusion, i can't give a solid comparison to any recent mozilla, but konqeror is on par with or ahead of anything else i've used (including ie, i would say, although i dont use it much anymore either), so long as you can live with the limitations of the kde environment.
The most cheesiest lesson learned in this election is that "Every Vote counts." Wrong. The only locality where one vote makes a difference is in Florida. Even there, its not clear that the votes in Palm Beach will count...
this is very certainly true. and it's a good thing that all of those voters in florida knew that the election was going to come down to their state, so they all went out and voted.
what a crock of shit. this time it was florida. next time maybe it will be virginia. you have know way of knowing when you cast your vote whether the election will be decided by your state or not. so yes, your vote does count. maybe it didn't make a big difference today, but who is to say it won't in the next election. or the one after that. or....
it was somewhat different in that case, because Perot, while he had different opinions than either of the candidates, was still fairly close to the center politically. most political scientists believe that perot attracted a roughly equal number of supporters from both parties (recall clinton won in '92 with something like 43% of the popular vote). Given Nader's very liberal views, I think it is safe to say, despite the numerous ranting and raving Nader fans on slashdot saying that there is no difference between Bush and Gore, that a significant majority of people who voted for Nader would have preferred a Gore presidency to a Bush presidency.
That being said, every one of them knew that by voting for Nader, they were contributing to this possibility, and they still voted for him...
that's funny. last time i looked at the count (about 3 A.M.) Bush was ahead by about 200,000 votes. Granted 200,000 is chump change considering they both had over 45,000,000.
oops. i just looked at cnn. appears gore is leading after all. nevermind.
Not that it matters. anyone who has taken a high school (or even grade school) level class on american government knows that this wouldn't be the first time apresident has won theelectoral vote without the popular vote. I don't see this spelling an end to the electoral college any time soon. It's been within our power to change it for some time, and I honestly don't see why it would change now over an election decided by less than one state's electoral vote and about 0.3% of the popular vote.
heh... have you tried upgrading to rpm-4.0?
the rpm package format changed from 3.0 to 4.0, (hence the change in major version number) and all of the rpm-4.0 packages that i have found are in rpm-4.0 format. so how to upgrade it?
hmmm.... seems we have a problem here, doesn't it...
--
a new release every month?
i would like to know where you get the idea that mandrake releases anywhere near that often. are you counting their beta releases? i have been using mandrake 7.1 since at least june when i upgraded from 7.0. im pretty sure it's been out since the middle of may. funny i never heard about the five differnt releases they made between 7.1 and 7.2
<Sarcasm off>
seriously, though, the mandrake folks make a release more or less every six months, which is pretty close to the release schedule of the other major distributions. the notable exception to this, of course, is debian, which seems to manage to get a new release out the door once every other year or so. (no wonder debian users are so enthralled with "apt-get update". i would be too if i had to wait that long for my distro to come out with a new release)
as far as upgrading mandrake, you have a couple of options:
1) MandrakeUpdate. this seems like some sort of apt-get thing i imagine (having never used either one) it automatically updates any updates for your installation. i have never used it, as i prefer to do my upgrading manually, so i have some control over what is happening. the one downfall of MandrakeUpdate is that it doesn't know how to handle non-mandrake updates. for example, if you have the helix-gnome mandrake packages installed, it will get quite confused, and probably wont work at all.
2. network update. radhat has for a long time had the ability to install/update via network (ftp/http/nfs) naturally, when mandrake branched off, they retained that capability. if you want to upgrade over the network, you just download the floppy image, boot up, and run the network update. it detects what packages you have installed and downloads/installs the updates.
3. download the RPMS. just decide what RPMS you want, download them yourself and do 'rpm -Uvh *.rpm'
4. download/buy the cd. download (or buy) the whole cd image, and run the update program from the cd. or the install program, if you want a clean slate.
all in all i have to say good job to the mandrake guys. 7.1 is i think the best linux distro i've ever tried, and i hope 7.2 will be as good. my only significant peeve with 7.1 that i can think of is the way the mangled netscape's key-bindings. i can understand them wanting to change the default bindings to be like the windows bindings ( i remember saying once upon a time that i was going to do that very thing myself) but they could have found a way to make that an option. and more importantly, they could have been consistent. why was alt-F remapped to ctrl-F, but alt-N was left unchanged? to me, this is far more confusing than the fact that the alt-* keybindings are inconsistent with most other apps and with netscape on windows. it seems like it would be easier to adjust to using alt-v for netscape instead of ctrl-v, than to figure out which commands were alt-* and which were ctrl-*. (iirc i think the commands in the File menu are alt-* and the rest are ctrl-*. even with a reason behind it, this still seems like a very arbitrary division) oh, well. just one of several reasons i never have (and never will) installed a netscape rpm.
--
as a follow-up, i just went and poked around the site www.bettervote.com that somebody mentioned above. not a bad site, although their "patent pending better match" technology seems to put a definite liberal bias in the questions it asks, and the answers it allows.
anyway, after answering all of the questions that it asked, i ended up with a rating of between 50% and 60% for every single candidate except alan keyes. maybe it really doesn't matter who i vote for...
perhaps i'll throw a vote at the libertartians so they can get federal funds in the next election. i don't want one of them in charge, but i would like their opinions to get a little more recognition.
well, hopefully someone else will read this, since i don't have the automatic +1 bonus that everyone else here seems to.
two things here. first of all, where can i find out about the local races? anyone know. i haven't seen much coverage of them in the papers (then again i never read the papers all that closely) as many people have said, i'm likely to make a much bigger difference in the local votes, but i really don't know anything about the candidates. i registered to vote where i am going to college (chicago) because i plan to continue to live here after i graduate, but i have never followed the political climate here much.
as for the presidential race. well, for all i've thought about it, the only thing i've decided so far is that i won't vote for gore. so here's the rundown on what i think:
bush: i've always considered myslef a republican, although this will be the first election i will be voting in. part of that probably had to do with an extremely conservative upbringing. i've lost a lot of faith in the republican party over the last four years, but i still tend to identify more closely with the republicans than with the democrats. anyway, the only thing that i really dislike about bush is the republican ties to big business. i favor bush's position on the estate tax (despite david brin's social engineering rant), i like the idea of education reform (although i don't particularly like vouchers, even though i went to a private school), etc. about the only thing gore has going for him are better positions regarding health care and prescription drug benefits, but in either of those two cases, gore's behind nader (imo). so if it weren't for big business, i'd vote bush.
browne: while i applaud the libertarian ideal, and i like a ot of his views, he's also kinda scary. while i am a strong opponent of gun control, his solution is extreme: repeal all federal gun laws. excuse me, i kinda like the fact that convicted felons are not allowed to own a firearm and that fully automatic weapons cannot be owned without a special permit. likewise, his position regarding the environment: sell of government lands because private owners will be better stewards of land they have a vested interest in. his argument is convincing; the vast majority of all serious pollution is done by corporate stewards of privately owned land. but what does this mean for national parks? is browne going to sell off yellowstone and the grand canyon as well? can you imagine how much a developer would pay for yellowstone to build condos for billionaires? his argument is that interest groups that care about the environment enough will buy some of these areas of land in order to protect it, but how much money do these groups have compared to the value of the land?
which brings us to nader. to quote brin: "gadzooks!!'. this guys scary. seriously. about the only thing he's got going for him is his privacy policy and his stance opposing large corporations. i think i disagree with him on just about every other issue. except for the issues about which he doesn't say anything at all, which is a lot of them. he seems to be running entirely on his economic platform and ignoring just about everything else. actually i guess i can't say i disagree with him on everything. his health care reformideas sound good. i'm not sure i agree that weneed national health care, but if we're going to have a health care system, it might as well be done right.
so that leaves me with this. if i'm going to vote for a major party candidate, i'd much rather vote for bush. i have a feeling that this would do no good whatsoever. i haven't seen the polls lately, but considering chicago's reputation for being democratic, i'd guess gore has a pretty strong hold on the electoral vote in illionois. if i decide to vote for a third party candidate, i have a choice between opposing big government and opposing big business. while i dislike big government on principle, right now i consider big business to be a bigger threat to my personal freedom. if either bush or browne had nader's personal privacy stance as part of their platform, they'd get my vote. even more so if they had his attitude about consumer protection (although that's a bit much to ask, especially from bush). anyway, my big beef with browne is that he needs to realize that our society has changed a fair amount since the constitution was wrtten, and the federal government needs to have some central authority, as there are things in our society that cannot be effectively left to the states. i think he's right that the government has gotten way to big, (and i like the idea of no income tax...) but he wants to make it way too small.
well, you could possible try to do what my grandfather did with his farm. he sold it while he was still alive, to my father and his brothers. i don't know the exact details of the arrangement, but the did continue to live on the farm for a while afterward. by this point in time, my father's brothers did most of the work anyway (my father left the farm to become a teacher). i don't know any of the details of the arrangement, and my grandpa is still alive right now, so i don't know how well the arrangement will actually work out, but i would think they would at least get to keep the land, even if all the money my grandpa saved up gets taxed...
wow, talk about offbase.
/. boogeymen to win the argument.
This talk about farmers & businessmen makes no sense because the estate tax proposals have nothing to do with these warm, fuzzy characters. This is about landed wealth & big business, not Jed with 500 acres in Iowa or Sue with her corner store in Boise.
both of your claims here are completely false.
1) estate taxes hit farm owners the hardest. if you don't believe me, you can look through the comments for several cases of farm and small business owners who have been hurt or nearly hurt by inheritance taxes. the problem is, that the assets that one inherently has when one owns a farm are almost invariable worth more than the minimum at which the estate tax kicks in full force. the problem is, unlike with the very rich people, all of these assets are physical, and the only way to pay the taxes on them is to sell them in order to convert physical assets to liquid cash. the heirs of bill gates wouldn't have it nearly so bad, as most of what thy would inherit would be liquid assets or assets that could easily be made liquid. and i know something about this from experience too. my grandfather decided to sell his entire farm to my father and his brothers in order to keep it from being taxed when they inherited it from them. i don't know how effective that will actually be, as i imagine now the money they payed him will be taxed instead, but at least they won't have to sell of the farm.
2) big business???? excuse me, could you please explain to me how in the world the estate tax has anything at all to do with big business? businesses don't die, and no one inherits anything from them. now you're just calling up one of the
Imagine if the prayer in school decision had gone the OTHER way. Imagine if Microsoft goes to the Supreme Court under Bush-appointed judges. Imagine rulings on the constitutionality of the DMCA!
hmm.... im imagining...
and you know what? i don't feel any safer in these cases with gore appointed judges than i do with bush appointed judges. contrary to mr. brin's comment regarding nader and the supreme court, the supreme court is one of the bigger reasons i'm interested in nader. in all of the cases likely headed towards the supreme court revolving about issues that matter to me, having a gore appointed judge in the supreme court doesn't make me feel any better than having a bush appointed judge in the supreme court
everything you say does not do a bit to show that gore is smarter than bush. i imagine the original poster has watched the debates as well.
when i watched the third debate, what i thought wsa not that bush was a blundering idiot. it was that gore is a far better public speaker than bush. i know that when i talk in front of a large group of people, i sound like a complete idiot. i'm not (i don't think, anyway) but i have no talent for public speaking. likewise my impression of georgebush is not that he's an idiot, but rather that he's not as good a public speaker as gore. maybe i just notice that because i've tried and failed to speak in public myself so many times.
anyway, it is a little unfair. your ability as a public speaker has little to nothing to do with how well you would do as president, but it has a big (possibly the biggest) influence on your chances of actually getting elected.
But anniversary of what? A WAG at the date of a possibly mythological event? We NPPs would rather pick at it than celebrate it.
it's not a mythological event. jesus christ really was born, whether you believe in his religious teachings or not. (at least, i'm assuming he was really born. he was a real person, who actually lived, which of course would imply that he was born...)
if you were truly pedantic, you would instead point out that most historical scholars now believe that, if the accounts of his birth in the bible are reasonably accurate (wrt the taxation by caesar and who was governor and such) that christ was actually born about 5-6 BC, meaning that we actually missed the millenium five years ago. that, and the fact that he was most likely actually born in the spring, considering the accounts regarding the shepherds in the fields and such....
taco once said when he posted an article that he would rather vote for an inanimate carbon rod than for george bush. me, i decided basically the same thing about al gore a long time ago. something along the lines of "i don't care who the republicans put up for president, he'll get my vote over gore." then i get george bush. sheeshh....
i'm pretty sure i agree with malda about bush. not that that changes my opinion about gore any. right now i think i'd rather vote for an inanimate carbon rod than either of the primary candidates. too bad there isn't one running. that's why i'm looking at the other candidates. if i vote for nader, it's not because i think there's no real difference between the primary candidates, it's because i think they're both bad.
right now, i think i probably will vote for brown or nader. i don't seriously believe either one has a chance to get elected. but i also don't think i can stand to vote for either gore or bush. and i won't not vote like in the last election (not because i didn't care back then, but i had just turned 18 before the election and couldn't be bothered to register)
is it just me or does the so-called "worker shortage" keep coming up about once every two to three months.
at any rate, from my experience, the market seems to be flooded with techs and cs majors. what there seems to be a strong lack of is people with a clue. as cs degree by itself means nothing. i have seen way to many people who finish up a cs degree and still don't have a clue. but if you have a degree and a clue, and you can demonstrate that going into an interview, you'll do well. a little experience doesn't hurt either...
i've been in and out of the workforce for 2 years now, and i'm about done with my degree. a lot of the people i've worked with have not had degrees. if you're around competent and clueful people, you really can't tell a big difference between those who have degrees and those who don't. i have been able to tell a big difference between people who have taken at least 2 years of college and people who haven't. at any rate, having a clue is more important than having a degree. but you should still get the degree. it may not do you as much good as you like straight out of college, but (at least from what i've seen) it will be a good thing to have several years down the road, when you want to start moving up the ranks, and not get replaced by other hot shot new programmers.
note that these are only my observations. as i said, i've only been in the workforce for about two years, and i haven't quite got my degree yet, so my interpretation of the situation may be wrong.
yeah, it pointed to my real homepage on a server that no longer exists. someday i'll fix it. not like i had anything there anyway. unless you want to see my resume....
alright, the department of justice has as much reason as everyone else here does to want this review to be impartial. why? because the united states department of justice is not related to the united states court system. remember that whole three branches of government thing?
jump a few years ahead. the carnivore review was a wash. the doj have put their handy little sniffers in place, and actually manage to catch a two bit drug smuggler who wasn't smart enough to encrypt his email. he sues the doj based on the unconstitutionality of the carnivore device. the judge agrees.
oops. now doj is up a creek. carnivore has been declared unconstitutional and all of the work they put into it is for nothing. what's worse, they never got any big convictions out of it, and the one little two-bit smuggler they did catch gets off the hook. not to mention all of the bad publicity the doj gets.
if the carnivore system is going to get declared illegal or unconstitutional by a federal judge, it is in the doj's best interest for these lawyers to point that out now. because the doj can't do anything about a judges decision. they can do something about the decision of these reviewers: they can listen to what they say, and, if neccessary, change the implementation of carnivore so that it behaves within what is considered to be acceptable behavior for electronic surveillance. because not all electronic surveillance is unconstitutional. and if carnivore does violate our constitutional rights, the case will get thrown out of court the first time they try to use it.
actually, it is widely accepted that the tyrannosaurus was mostly a scavenger and did little hunting for his own food.
so your summary of tyrranosaurus' attacks is pretty much irrelevant... then again, so is this post.
Dont talk down to us, we probably know more than you do!
never assume you know more than anyone. you will tend to find yourself proved wrong quite often. in this case, you may know more about setting up a linux box, but i doubt you know more than he does about the issue in question: the legality of the carnivore system. he is one of the country's more respected lawyers in the field of law & technology.
After reading his evasive and non-responsive answers, its pretty obvious that Mr Perrit (or should I say " Mr Parrot ") appears to be a shill, a disengenuous legal weasel, and is quite obviously comfortable at being kept firmly in the government's pocket.
actually, it was quite obvious to me that his answers where non-substantive because the questions were non-substantive. how many forms of "why should we believe that your report is not going to be censored" and "is the doj reading your answers to this survey" do we need to subject the guy to. there were a few substanive questions that i would have liked a bit more substantial answers to, but for the most part, i thought dean perrit did a good job responding to our accusations.
everyone here apparently has already made up their mind that carnivore is illegal and will be abused and that no matter what the result if this review is, the government has a premade report ready that they will publish in place of the "independent review". at this point, why did we even bother asking him any questions?