Mint is Ubuntu with an additional repository that contains Cinnamon, and a different set of default packages. When I say Mint is Ubuntu with..., I mean that literally, as in (for Rosa):
/etc/apt $ cat sources.list.d/official-package-repositories.list deb http://packages.linuxmint.com/ rosa main upstream import
deb http://extra.linuxmint.com/ rosa main
deb http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu trusty main restricted universe multiverse deb http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu trusty-updates main restricted universe multiverse
deb http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ trusty-security main restricted universe multiverse deb http://archive.canonical.com/ubuntu/ trusty partner
"Ubuntu Spin" is the term given to a variant of Ubuntu that's the result of a collaboration between Canonical and an interested community. For example, KUbuntu is a spin with KDE replacing Unity as the desktop.
So...
What the author is saying is given Mint is just Cinnamon + Ubuntu, why distribute this somewhat hacked together kludge, rather than collaborating with Canonical? If the two works together, then the "Mint" side would be able to build on Ubuntu in cooperation with Canonical, leaving "CUbuntu" to have the same advantages as other spins (for example, up to date releases, testing so that changes in one part of Ubuntu do not damage CUbuntu, etc) while still getting a Cinnamon desktop.
That's one solution, another is to get more people and disentangle the project from Ubuntu completely. It depends upon what the Mint team actually want.
I would say he's accurately describing what Mint is, not what user's want or don't want. He's saying "This is what it is, so why not do it properly?"
I don't doubt that many Mint users want something different, but right now Mint is Ubuntu + An Extra Repo with Other Packages + An default package list that's slightly different. It's so much of a hack that a recent Ubuntu update caused/etc/issue and/etc/issue.net in Mint systems to report the machine as running Ubuntu, not Mint (in fairness we were all prompted to ask us if we wanted that changed. Somewhat amusing but...)
Mint kinda needs to decide what direction it is. Becoming something other than a flavor of Ubuntu means disconnecting one's self from Ubuntu, having a large pool of maintainers, etc. That's probably not something they have the resources to do.
So... the other option is to just be explicitly a part of Ubuntu, be CUbuntu or whatever. That would provide end users with exactly what we want - a well maintained, well supported, operating system whose desktop is actually modern and usable rather than trendy and terrible. It'd also discourage unnecessary silliness like mdmwebkit which seems to exist solely out of a wish to show independence, rather than for any functional reason.
But the "Rely on Ubuntu while replacing problematic packages" model? Nah. It's ugly. It's pretty much a recipe for things being missed, leading to instability and security problems in the long run as Ubuntu and Mint diverge further and further, while the latter continues to rely on the independent and unpredictable choices of the former./etc/issue showing Ubuntu is amusing. The next change may well not be.
Meh, I'd prefer shorter range, but some way to create multiple access points in a user friendly way to make the range work the way you want. Needless to say, those APs should be cheap.
I want to elminate blackspots in my own home. What I don't want to do is give the neighbors free internet access.
Unfortunately the bluetooth mouse and keyboard market isn't particularly well served. Widgets exist, but 99% of them are aimed at tablets or phones. Mice support in particular is fairly dire.
I wasn't aware that anyone other than T-Mobile supported it, but it's good to hear otherwise.
That said, Wi-fi calling means you need access to Wi-fi. Which generally means you need permission to access a specific AP. An advantage "Indoors LTE" might have is that you'd be automatically authenticated via the SIM card on any compatible AP, and presumably get your data routed via the carrier rather than tied to the hosts' IP block.
That seems worth doing, as right now roaming with Wi-fi is awkward in an environment in which most people don't want the liabilities and insecurity that goes with open APs.
It's a phone, a small, losable, stealable, breakable, device you normally store in your front pocket. If you're storing valuable information on your device and not backing it up anywhere else, you're doing it wrong.
apple actually can say they have zero way to unlock the device
Well, why aren't they? They've made it clear that it is possible to produce the version of iOS the FBI is requesting and install it on the iPhone. At no point have they said "Even if we made it, there's no way to install it, so checkmate FBI Haha we win."
Why are they saying it's possible if it isn't? Why open themselves to contempt and obstruction charges by pretending what the FBI is asking for is possible and would work and is only not being supplied for political reasons?
It didn't happen to your copy because it hasn't happened to anyone. It's an urban legend, based upon a few anecdotes that were almost certainly people covering for their mistakes (or covering for the fact they wanted to see it), and Microsoft being on record that they'll set it as a default install when you select optional updates. (You'll still be able to uncheck the update though.)
The installation process is interactive. You can't actually install Windows 10 without confirming several steps.
MIcrosoft would be sued to oblivion if they non-consensually installed Windows 10 on random PCs, breaking software left and right and rendering machines unusable. They're not doing it.
The government is offering this instead of a fine. What do you think happens if VW says "No"? Its executives are hauled off to jail? VW is banned in the US?
No. What happens is the original penalties apply.
This is the equivalent of the police telling a serial shoplifter they have two options: A trial and likely jail sentence, or they can go on a community service program cleaning up the roads in front of the businesses they damaged.
It is entirely fine, proper, and in the public interest, for the government to offer an offender the option of doing something that would benefit the community at large as an alternative to a punishment that wouldn't change a thing.
Europe has two things going for it here. The first is that they've been careful allocating frequencies, and the second is that they've told the carriers that they have to agree on common standards and interoperable equipment (with "personal mobility" - that is, SIM cards.) The phone companies came up with the GSM family of standards (GSM, UMTS, and now LTE) and it all pretty much just works.
The US didn't do any of this, partially because of lobbying by a certain semi-conductor/wireless research company, and partially because they didn't understand what Europe was doing, so we ended up with multiple conflicting standards and rather a lot of different frequency bands to run them on.
This means that we have two nationwide carriers who run GSM family networks, plus two that run a mix of IS-95/2000 networks, that are finally implementing LTE, but not the rest of the GSM standards. As LTE is still to a certain extent in flux (there's something like three different ways to do voice, for instance) and LTE isn't nationwide yet, nobody can sell a simple device that works anywhere in the US. It's needlessly expensive to support both cdmaOne family standards and GSM family, and the carriers are still buying new swathes of spectrum that need hardware support.
The one I'm using now cost $30. I don't mean "$30 plus a two year contract", I mean that was the contractless cost of it. That's roughly what I paid for my last featurephone.
One thing I've learned from the experience is that a cheap phone is generally going to be better than a hipster phone. The cheap phone will have buttons on it, something hipsters demand be removed on your $300-600 models because they, uh, destroy the fine lines of the phone or something? The cheap phone will have an SD card slot because it knows it doesn't come with enough memory, the hipster phone will assume 16Gb is enough for anyone. The cheap phone will have a long life removable battery because they're trying to sell to people with "You'll find this useful, and it's cheap!" rather than "This is the most exotic thing you will buy for three months, after which you'll throw it away and spend $300-600 on the next model."
Weird, and not what I was expecting. And yeah, I like it and think it was totally worth $30.
The pope didn't say what people think he said or so says his spokesperson.
Yeah but that's actually a fact not pertenant. The fact is Trump had another public meltdown when he thought Pope Francis had accused Trump of being unchristian.
And the apparent anger amongst many in the extreme right for the current Pope's priorities is fairly well documented.
Ow! I just stubbed my toe! Damned SJWs! And now my computer just stalled! SJWs strike again! Trump just won another primary! Those SJWs are ruining everything!
It wasn't 4:3. it was encoded as 4:3, but letter boxed, so you were seeing a widescreen cut, not a 4:3 cut.
It's a shame, as it meant it wasn't as high a resolution as many wanted, and yeah, Slashdot was full of people claiming that George Lucas had sexually assaulted in the worst way them by releasing such a DVD when it came out, because apparently if someone doesn't do exactly what you want then they're the worst people ever.
Minor correction - I believe there wasn't a name in the scroll at all. Basically you saw "Star Wars" and then the scroll, which had no title because it wasn't necessary because Star Wars was already the title.
Somewhere I have a CED (yes, really) of the first movie, I think it dates back to the pre-1981 cut, so I'll have to watch it and work out how they handled it.
You probably saw that in the re-release in 1981 (I think, I forget the exact year, but they re-released it just before ESB.) It absolutely was called "Star Wars" in the original scroll in 1977 (or '78, when I watched it, in the UK.)
IS(IS|IL|) is a violent organization. They're using Twitter as a means to recruit, not to transition to some non-violent pro-democracy form that uses the power of persuasion to make people happy members of whatever extremist religious sect they pretend to represent.
It's also fair to say that if they did pick on "the Clintons" or whatever your preferred target would be, Anonymous would also end up attacking the low hanging fruit, say, their Twitter feed or public facing websites, or whatever, which you'll note are also the "peaceful" parts of what the US establishment uses. Anonymous isn't about to hack into the military's networks and disable the ability of the US government to use drones. For one thing, that'd be quite a bit harder. For another, while hacking Twitter and sabotaging US military equipment both qualify as illegal, the latter actually has the death penalty associated with it, so the stakes are somewhat higher.
That said, as I understand it, Anonymous is a free-for-all in terms of who can get involved, so if that's what you want to do, well... technically nobody in that group is stopping you. OpGetOurselvesSentencedToDeathByTryingToSabotageDrones certainly is something you can start and participate in.
No, they want Apple to create a "one-off" insecure version of iOS. Source: I was personally told this by Tim Cook.
Well, OK, he wrote me a letter.
Well, OK, he wrote a lot of people that same letter and has probably never heard of me or had me in mind when writing it. But he is a person, and he did tell me this via said open letter, so that counts as being personally told this by Tim Cook right?
They don't need to go that far. They just need to update the iPhone's operating system with an insecure version. The iPhone will update itself with whatever software Apple tells it to.
They don't even need you to put your finger on the reader. One of the first things law enforcement will do after detaining you is take your finger prints.
A finger print scanner is virtually useless against law enforcement, even ignoring xkcd 538.
Slashdot Mirror
Mint is Ubuntu with an additional repository that contains Cinnamon, and a different set of default packages. When I say Mint is Ubuntu with ..., I mean that literally, as in (for Rosa):
"Ubuntu Spin" is the term given to a variant of Ubuntu that's the result of a collaboration between Canonical and an interested community. For example, KUbuntu is a spin with KDE replacing Unity as the desktop.
So...
What the author is saying is given Mint is just Cinnamon + Ubuntu, why distribute this somewhat hacked together kludge, rather than collaborating with Canonical? If the two works together, then the "Mint" side would be able to build on Ubuntu in cooperation with Canonical, leaving "CUbuntu" to have the same advantages as other spins (for example, up to date releases, testing so that changes in one part of Ubuntu do not damage CUbuntu, etc) while still getting a Cinnamon desktop.
That's one solution, another is to get more people and disentangle the project from Ubuntu completely. It depends upon what the Mint team actually want.
I would say he's accurately describing what Mint is, not what user's want or don't want. He's saying "This is what it is, so why not do it properly?"
I don't doubt that many Mint users want something different, but right now Mint is Ubuntu + An Extra Repo with Other Packages + An default package list that's slightly different. It's so much of a hack that a recent Ubuntu update caused /etc/issue and /etc/issue.net in Mint systems to report the machine as running Ubuntu, not Mint (in fairness we were all prompted to ask us if we wanted that changed. Somewhat amusing but...)
Mint kinda needs to decide what direction it is. Becoming something other than a flavor of Ubuntu means disconnecting one's self from Ubuntu, having a large pool of maintainers, etc. That's probably not something they have the resources to do.
So... the other option is to just be explicitly a part of Ubuntu, be CUbuntu or whatever. That would provide end users with exactly what we want - a well maintained, well supported, operating system whose desktop is actually modern and usable rather than trendy and terrible. It'd also discourage unnecessary silliness like mdmwebkit which seems to exist solely out of a wish to show independence, rather than for any functional reason.
But the "Rely on Ubuntu while replacing problematic packages" model? Nah. It's ugly. It's pretty much a recipe for things being missed, leading to instability and security problems in the long run as Ubuntu and Mint diverge further and further, while the latter continues to rely on the independent and unpredictable choices of the former. /etc/issue showing Ubuntu is amusing. The next change may well not be.
Meh, I'd prefer shorter range, but some way to create multiple access points in a user friendly way to make the range work the way you want. Needless to say, those APs should be cheap.
I want to elminate blackspots in my own home. What I don't want to do is give the neighbors free internet access.
Under Gentoo it's more like 7.35-7.7.
Unfortunately the bluetooth mouse and keyboard market isn't particularly well served. Widgets exist, but 99% of them are aimed at tablets or phones. Mice support in particular is fairly dire.
Hopefully that'll change soon...
I wasn't aware that anyone other than T-Mobile supported it, but it's good to hear otherwise.
That said, Wi-fi calling means you need access to Wi-fi. Which generally means you need permission to access a specific AP. An advantage "Indoors LTE" might have is that you'd be automatically authenticated via the SIM card on any compatible AP, and presumably get your data routed via the carrier rather than tied to the hosts' IP block.
That seems worth doing, as right now roaming with Wi-fi is awkward in an environment in which most people don't want the liabilities and insecurity that goes with open APs.
It's a phone, a small, losable, stealable, breakable, device you normally store in your front pocket. If you're storing valuable information on your device and not backing it up anywhere else, you're doing it wrong.
Well, why aren't they? They've made it clear that it is possible to produce the version of iOS the FBI is requesting and install it on the iPhone. At no point have they said "Even if we made it, there's no way to install it, so checkmate FBI Haha we win."
Why are they saying it's possible if it isn't? Why open themselves to contempt and obstruction charges by pretending what the FBI is asking for is possible and would work and is only not being supplied for political reasons?
It didn't happen to your copy because it hasn't happened to anyone. It's an urban legend, based upon a few anecdotes that were almost certainly people covering for their mistakes (or covering for the fact they wanted to see it), and Microsoft being on record that they'll set it as a default install when you select optional updates. (You'll still be able to uncheck the update though.)
The installation process is interactive. You can't actually install Windows 10 without confirming several steps.
MIcrosoft would be sued to oblivion if they non-consensually installed Windows 10 on random PCs, breaking software left and right and rendering machines unusable. They're not doing it.
Well, that cheered me up no end, knowing now that most Americans watch news of the same level of quality as NPR... ;-)
The government is offering this instead of a fine. What do you think happens if VW says "No"? Its executives are hauled off to jail? VW is banned in the US?
No. What happens is the original penalties apply.
This is the equivalent of the police telling a serial shoplifter they have two options: A trial and likely jail sentence, or they can go on a community service program cleaning up the roads in front of the businesses they damaged.
It is entirely fine, proper, and in the public interest, for the government to offer an offender the option of doing something that would benefit the community at large as an alternative to a punishment that wouldn't change a thing.
Europe has two things going for it here. The first is that they've been careful allocating frequencies, and the second is that they've told the carriers that they have to agree on common standards and interoperable equipment (with "personal mobility" - that is, SIM cards.) The phone companies came up with the GSM family of standards (GSM, UMTS, and now LTE) and it all pretty much just works.
The US didn't do any of this, partially because of lobbying by a certain semi-conductor/wireless research company, and partially because they didn't understand what Europe was doing, so we ended up with multiple conflicting standards and rather a lot of different frequency bands to run them on.
This means that we have two nationwide carriers who run GSM family networks, plus two that run a mix of IS-95/2000 networks, that are finally implementing LTE, but not the rest of the GSM standards. As LTE is still to a certain extent in flux (there's something like three different ways to do voice, for instance) and LTE isn't nationwide yet, nobody can sell a simple device that works anywhere in the US. It's needlessly expensive to support both cdmaOne family standards and GSM family, and the carriers are still buying new swathes of spectrum that need hardware support.
Which sucks.
Any chance they're using Project Ara for this? That'd at least mean future interoperability.
In my case the update didn't just change my default browser to Edge, but it replaced services.exe with systemd.
The one I'm using now cost $30. I don't mean "$30 plus a two year contract", I mean that was the contractless cost of it. That's roughly what I paid for my last featurephone.
One thing I've learned from the experience is that a cheap phone is generally going to be better than a hipster phone. The cheap phone will have buttons on it, something hipsters demand be removed on your $300-600 models because they, uh, destroy the fine lines of the phone or something? The cheap phone will have an SD card slot because it knows it doesn't come with enough memory, the hipster phone will assume 16Gb is enough for anyone. The cheap phone will have a long life removable battery because they're trying to sell to people with "You'll find this useful, and it's cheap!" rather than "This is the most exotic thing you will buy for three months, after which you'll throw it away and spend $300-600 on the next model."
Weird, and not what I was expecting. And yeah, I like it and think it was totally worth $30.
Yeah but that's actually a fact not pertenant. The fact is Trump had another public meltdown when he thought Pope Francis had accused Trump of being unchristian.
And the apparent anger amongst many in the extreme right for the current Pope's priorities is fairly well documented.
Ow! I just stubbed my toe! Damned SJWs! And now my computer just stalled! SJWs strike again! Trump just won another primary! Those SJWs are ruining everything!
Can I have +10 Insightful for this post?
It wasn't 4:3. it was encoded as 4:3, but letter boxed, so you were seeing a widescreen cut, not a 4:3 cut.
It's a shame, as it meant it wasn't as high a resolution as many wanted, and yeah, Slashdot was full of people claiming that George Lucas had sexually assaulted in the worst way them by releasing such a DVD when it came out, because apparently if someone doesn't do exactly what you want then they're the worst people ever.
Somewhere I have a CED (yes, really) of the first movie, I think it dates back to the pre-1981 cut, so I'll have to watch it and work out how they handled it.
You probably saw that in the re-release in 1981 (I think, I forget the exact year, but they re-released it just before ESB.) It absolutely was called "Star Wars" in the original scroll in 1977 (or '78, when I watched it, in the UK.)
IS(IS|IL|) is a violent organization. They're using Twitter as a means to recruit, not to transition to some non-violent pro-democracy form that uses the power of persuasion to make people happy members of whatever extremist religious sect they pretend to represent.
It's also fair to say that if they did pick on "the Clintons" or whatever your preferred target would be, Anonymous would also end up attacking the low hanging fruit, say, their Twitter feed or public facing websites, or whatever, which you'll note are also the "peaceful" parts of what the US establishment uses. Anonymous isn't about to hack into the military's networks and disable the ability of the US government to use drones. For one thing, that'd be quite a bit harder. For another, while hacking Twitter and sabotaging US military equipment both qualify as illegal, the latter actually has the death penalty associated with it, so the stakes are somewhat higher.
That said, as I understand it, Anonymous is a free-for-all in terms of who can get involved, so if that's what you want to do, well... technically nobody in that group is stopping you. OpGetOurselvesSentencedToDeathByTryingToSabotageDrones certainly is something you can start and participate in.
LZW (and by extension GIF) isn't patented any more. It expired about twelve years ago.
No, they want Apple to create a "one-off" insecure version of iOS. Source: I was personally told this by Tim Cook.
Well, OK, he wrote me a letter.
Well, OK, he wrote a lot of people that same letter and has probably never heard of me or had me in mind when writing it. But he is a person, and he did tell me this via said open letter, so that counts as being personally told this by Tim Cook right?
They don't need to go that far. They just need to update the iPhone's operating system with an insecure version. The iPhone will update itself with whatever software Apple tells it to.
Tim Cook has made it clear that this is both technically possible and something Apple absolutely refuses to do. I have to say I think they're making a praiseworthy stand.
They don't even need you to put your finger on the reader. One of the first things law enforcement will do after detaining you is take your finger prints.
A finger print scanner is virtually useless against law enforcement, even ignoring xkcd 538.