Well, actually, my system is a bit special. There's a Linux box acting as a firewall/router at the front-end, for a start, and that's why I had to spend extra time setting it up. As other people seem to be reporting here, normal setups seem to work without additional screwing around.
Surprisingly, Comcast is now giving out/64 IPv6 addresses in my area (south-eastern Massachusetts). Spent a couple of evenings last week getting it all connected. Works fine.
Maybe it's me, but Firefox 26 would crash at the drop of a hat (and that's on Windows and Linux). I would sincerely hope that 27 is somewhat better in that respect.
Agreed. Sony, who used to make great products, started going downhill the moment they "bought" Columbia Pictures. Now they only seem to be able to produce DRM-laden crap.
Google's "punishment" seems to me to be about right for the seriousness of the "crime". Swartz's was not. In fact, the penalty Swartz was threatened with was the actual result of "lobbying fees and campaign contributions" (by the MAFIAA and its ilk).
Given that the **AA are likely to sue even if the filename sounds like one of their movies/songs, and given that mp3/ogg etc. are lossy codecs, you don't have to send them a scan of a bill at all. Just scrawl "Ten Dollars" on a piece of paper, scan it, and send it in.
But they managed to break addon compability 7 times in between.
Yep, that's what happened. They changed the versioning strategy, but left the addon compatibility as it was. Since most of the good reasons for running Firefox were its addons, they wiped out their advantage overnight. Apparently the addon developers were all expected to modify their apps once a month.
They'd have been much better off having addon compatibility rely not on the browser version, but on the API version, and left that alone unless it absolutely needed to be changed (*waves at Python developers, who don't seem to have a clue either*).
Uh-huh. Have you always specialised in cheap shots, or is this a new development?
You're ignoring the size of the redhat customer base and its extensive use in enterprise systems (my own included). If this crap catches on, it's likely to spread to the other distributions; it's best to stop this exercise in change-for-change's-sake before it catches on.
To explain the point about dbus: originally, as a desktop IPC bus, it probably wasn't such a bad idea. It seems, however, to have spread beyond that point: it starts early in the boot process, and seems to be used by more and more processes every time I look. This might not be so bad if it was well-designed, but it's not: chief among my objections to it is the requirement for a reboot every time the thing gets upgraded (or, presumably, crashes). This is one of the things we all bashed Windows over for years and years -- and now that Microsoft seems to be improving in that respect, Linux starts to require it. This is progress????
I think the world would be better off if RedHat went off and annoyed some other planet. First dbus, and now this. Why in the name of all that's holy are they making simple things complicated?
How about a law that requires a company changing its terms of service to tell you exactly what the changes are and how they affect you, rather than simply saying that they've changed them, with a link to the new version (and a fat lot of good it'll do you, too)? Back when I had a PayPal account, that was one of the most annoying things about them.
Something I've never understood: exactly what benefit does the community gain from allowing limited-liability companies? If someone is free to establish a limited-liability corporation, and it goes broke owing lots of money to others, why should they be allowed to keep their own assets and, if they want, go on to start another such company?
I'm sure there must be a reason we allow this, but for the life of me I can't think of one.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, actually, my system is a bit special. There's a Linux box acting as a firewall/router at the front-end, for a start, and that's why I had to spend extra time setting it up. As other people seem to be reporting here, normal setups seem to work without additional screwing around.
Surprisingly, Comcast is now giving out /64 IPv6 addresses in my area (south-eastern Massachusetts). Spent a couple of evenings last week getting it all connected. Works fine.
Maybe it's me, but Firefox 26 would crash at the drop of a hat (and that's on Windows and Linux). I would sincerely hope that 27 is somewhat better in that respect.
Samsungs's products are crap, anyway (IMHO).
Now we're going to be deluged with nitwits careening about the place.
Rich nitwits, but still nitwits.
The "Any" key would be far more useful.
Nope. It'll be prosecuted under (wait for it) .... Ohm's Law.
I think they'll find there'll be some resistance to that.
Agreed. Sony, who used to make great products, started going downhill the moment they "bought" Columbia Pictures. Now they only seem to be able to produce DRM-laden crap.
Talk about the tail wagging the dog.
Google's "punishment" seems to me to be about right for the seriousness of the "crime". Swartz's was not. In fact, the penalty Swartz was threatened with was the actual result of "lobbying fees and campaign contributions" (by the MAFIAA and its ilk).
After all, DHS must have _some_ use. This might turn out to be it.
> They say they're going to add new features
Like they did with Windows Vista "Ultimate"? What was it -- two (lame) games in about five years?
I don't think they even bothered doing it with Windows 7 "Ultimate". Perhaps the three people who bought it could confirm.
> You mean that same governer general who is appointed by the GOVERNMENT!
November 11, 1975.
Given that the **AA are likely to sue even if the filename sounds like one of their movies/songs, and given that mp3/ogg etc. are lossy codecs, you don't have to send them a scan of a bill at all. Just scrawl "Ten Dollars" on a piece of paper, scan it, and send it in.
That should have exactly the same effect.
... or perhaps "I'm sorry she's a bitch"?
Nope, sorry, there was no such thing. Nearest we came was Apollo 13.
Clever .sig you've got there.
Yep, that's what happened. They changed the versioning strategy, but left the addon compatibility as it was. Since most of the good reasons for running Firefox were its addons, they wiped out their advantage overnight. Apparently the addon developers were all expected to modify their apps once a month.
They'd have been much better off having addon compatibility rely not on the browser version, but on the API version, and left that alone unless it absolutely needed to be changed (*waves at Python developers, who don't seem to have a clue either*).
Uh-huh. Have you always specialised in cheap shots, or is this a new development?
You're ignoring the size of the redhat customer base and its extensive use in enterprise systems (my own included). If this crap catches on, it's likely to spread to the other distributions; it's best to stop this exercise in change-for-change's-sake before it catches on.
To explain the point about dbus: originally, as a desktop IPC bus, it probably wasn't such a bad idea. It seems, however, to have spread beyond that point: it starts early in the boot process, and seems to be used by more and more processes every time I look. This might not be so bad if it was well-designed, but it's not: chief among my objections to it is the requirement for a reboot every time the thing gets upgraded (or, presumably, crashes). This is one of the things we all bashed Windows over for years and years -- and now that Microsoft seems to be improving in that respect, Linux starts to require it. This is progress????
I think the world would be better off if RedHat went off and annoyed some other planet. First dbus, and now this. Why in the name of all that's holy are they making simple things complicated?
How about a law that requires a company changing its terms of service to tell you exactly what the changes are and how they affect you, rather than simply saying that they've changed them, with a link to the new version (and a fat lot of good it'll do you, too)? Back when I had a PayPal account, that was one of the most annoying things about them.
Thank you. I figured there had to be a reason.
Interestingly, the "fortune" at the bottom of this page has:
> If you are smart enough to know that you're not smart enough to be an Engineer, then you're in Business.
Something I've never understood: exactly what benefit does the community gain from allowing limited-liability companies? If someone is free to establish a limited-liability corporation, and it goes broke owing lots of money to others, why should they be allowed to keep their own assets and, if they want, go on to start another such company?
I'm sure there must be a reason we allow this, but for the life of me I can't think of one.
The "Invisible Hand" doesn't work on monopolies, like when they're the sole holder of a government contract.
And so you should be ...