In the Mozilla case, nobody was fired, and the thing that offended people was funding a hate campaign against homosexuals (describing them as a danger to children, for example), not "voting". Eich resigned, rightly, after realizing that his actions meant he was legitimately and fairly distrusted by a significant proportion of the community.
So he's not wrong, you are, on every single point.
However, leading your life in your own manner within legal guidelines should be protected, regardless of how you feel personally about those actions.
That's very convenient. Someone is allowed to fund a hate campaign, with a view to getting the rights of blameless people curtailed, and that's fine and dandy because it's "legal", but those people aren't allowed to live their lives (and don't get the same protection) because of the actions of the first person.
I assume you're also against the boycott and campaign of United too? I mean, say what you like, but legally they were entitled to call the police, initiating the use of force, against a passenger who was the victim of their own fuck-up. They deserve to be "protected" from criticism and boycotts, right?
As far as BDSM goes it's actually relatively SFW: It's "lifestyle" domination (ie participants engage in it more or less all the time they're in contact with one another, rather than for sessions/dates that have a beginning and end), where men are (always) in charge, and there's some kind of strict hierarchy around women (who are always subservient to men and have only limited, or no, power.) The name comes from a series of books about "Gor", an erotic fantasy world where such a power dynamic existed.
It's not all nipple clamps and spankings in BDSM, it's a pretty diverse range of fetishes.
KDE would be absurd. Cinnamon is the obvious alternative, given like Unity and GNOME 3 it's built on the same underlying software stack, but uses the desktop metaphor that, ultimately, is the key feature that stopped people from embracing GNOME 3, and to a lesser extent Unity.
KDE also has historically had poor support under Ubuntu. Cinnamon was built for Ubuntu - that is, Mint - the base distribution from the same people - is Ubuntu + Cinnamon (or MATE)
I don't want to tar all boomers, obviously. But what's different about them compared to X and Millennials is that those boomers who "get it" with tech are looked down upon and treated as inferiors by the majority who don't. That's kinda changing, as they recognize they have no choice, but you hear the resentment.
And yes, I'm very grateful to people like Woz, Miner, and Haynie who wanted to create great tech things, and even to people like Jobs and Gates who recognized opportunities to make money from businesses desperate to manage increasingly more complex industries, helping mainstream computing in the process.
It was Generation X who first, as a generation, wholeheartedly embraced computing. We might not have done if great people like Jay Miner or Chuck Peddle hadn't cleared the way and produced some of the essential building blocks needed to make computing compelling, but we didn't have to worry about being ostracized by other members of our own generation - we "got" it.
Any Gen Xer or Millennial who says "Oh, I don't really know anything about computers, that's geek stuff" is very much out of place and a minority. That's the boomer mainstream for some reason - ignorant, and proud of it. It's frustrating.
Well, definitely more than the boomers that I regularly see that think they deserve double everyone else's salary for not knowing very basic "computery" things...
No, he got crucified for saying that half of people don't pay any taxes, and that those people won't vote for him (plus something else I'll get to in a moment.)
Both are false. Everyone pays taxes - just not always income taxes. And given the people who are on low enough incomes that they don't pay income tax are disproportionately:
- Southern blue collar workers (no unions to raise their salaries)
- The military (have you seen the shitty wages they earn?)
- The elderly/retired
...it's probable that most people who don't pay income tax are Republicans.
What was the other thing? Oh yeah, the reason it wasn't just stupid, it was offensive: he said "My job is not to care about these people".
He... doesn't care about people on low incomes.
Not really what the GP was saying at all. And obviously offensive and disqualifying comments if you're running for the President of the US - though perhaps not any more.
When you're living paycheck to paycheck, no, it is impractical to increase your 401k contributions.
I swear the average Slashdotter is a son of Trump or something - or at any rate has never experienced low incomes. Back in 1995, I actually got to the point that I couldn't eat for two days because I'd literally completely run out of money and food. I wasn't living extravagantly - a tiny black and white TV getting its signal via the antenna was my major entertainment, for example. No car. Cheap junk furniture.
I'm comfortable now, but it recently opened my eyes when I looked at the Wikipedia page of a city near where I live and found the median household income there is barely $20,000 a year. That, adjusted for inflation, is less than what I was earning in 1995 (ignoring inflation it's slightly higher.) That's household income - as in multiple people are trying to live from that money. I don't know how they do it, but I can pretty much guarantee they're not putting money into 401ks.
So you admit the customer has no choice here but to "accept" blatantly unfair terms and conditions that contradict the nature of the product being sold?
The other airport was four hours drive away, it's hard to believe they couldn't have resolved the issue by using a car. Even if they hired a taxi, the fare would have been lower than the compensation they were required to pay.
All available evidence says Dr Dao was telling the truth. USA Today (or a newspaper owned thereof) tried to do a hit piece on him this morning (no link, I'm not giving them clicks) where they pointed out he'd had his medical license suspended in the past due to issues with controlled drugs. As the article admits, the license was re-instated and he's a practicing doctor now.
(USA Today needs to understand that "He's no angel" stories only work when smearing black teenagers.)
Yes... but there's no incentive. Essentially the airline is allowed to say "No takers for $1,349? OK, well, in that case we're kicking off the four people we don't like the most, and they each get $1,350. Unless you paid less than 1/3 of that for your ticket, in which case we're giving you just 3x the value of your ticket (yeah, the limit isn't even $1,350, it's 3x the value of your ticket capped at $1,350.)
What baffles me is that United didn't even do that. Passengers said the largest offer they heard was in the hundreds.
Yes, they can offer more, but it's PR at that point. The law has been written to favor the airlines - which, incidentally, means that the apologists are sorta right, the entire thing was almost certainly legal. Not moral "because it's the law" as the apologists claim, just technically legal, and Mr Dao is probably screwed.
United had a moral obligation to solve its mistake peacefully. The fact it didn't, and the fact it's totally legal that it didn't, means we need to reform the law. End the cap: nobody should be forced to give up their seat on an overbooked flight.
That would be Chrysler, it's always being purchased...
If half of all new cars have some level of self driving ability in ten years, then it's highly unlikely the 25% threshold will be met. Most cars on the road aren't new, and we don't know what percentage of car users will use the self driving capabilities of the cars that have it. That said, Tesla plans to make the (mid-range) Model 3 self driving (with the firmware permitting the feature released later this year), so there's at least some chance that within 10 years virtually all new cars will have the feature.
It is. People living there receive more services, and businesses located there get more custom. And nobody's forced to use a mode of transportation they dislike - you're allowed to walk, you can take a bus or train, or you can drive. It's a win-win for everyone.
I love Ubuntu. I'm not a fan of Mir, largely because I don't agree that it is a reasonable replacement for X11. Nor is Wayland. Both essentially throw out the baby with the bathwater.
As a result, I don't recognize the criticism here. Mir isn't "mainstream", it never was. It was criticized from two angles, neither of which have anything to do with the kind of technological hipsterism Shuttleworth is claiming: Wayland advocates saw it as a rival project, and long time Unix/GNU+Linux users saw it as something that'd remove critical functionality they rely upon. It was never criticized for being mainstream - it was never mainstream!
Hyperloops will have similar, perhaps even worse, issues with legroom, nausea, and a lack of capacity, plus additional issues with noise, and that's if they're able to resolve the other issues.
A train, yeah. A small, cramped, windowless, probably noisy capsule in a tube, however, is another story, even if the journey time is substantially lower.
Hyperloop is just the latest development in making transportation even shittier.
I didn't like Unity, but I respected it, and found it to be usable - something GNOME Shell just isn't, not without a lot of work and a massive change in workflow and expectations anyway. Unity was a serious attempt to build a better desktop, but Canonical married itself to concepts before testing them in the real world, and I honestly think if they'd done more user testing, the dock wouldn't have been left in (not in that form anyway), and the "search for everything" model would have been dumped.
I wish they'd been successful, and in a contest between GNOME Shell and Unity, I wish they'd had have prevailed.
Alas Shuttleworth's comments suggest that, while they'll contribute to GNOME, it's unlikely they'll ship any improvements without the GNOME team's blessing. So this is a wholesale surrender to a failed, deeply unpopular, desktop, by a better alternative. It's very sad.
KDE missed its chance, and it's never felt to me like the designers really had much of a vision which means it's always been more of a kludge than GNOME - albeit right now, that makes it better than GNOME 3. Meanwhile whether you're using Unity, GNOME 3, or Cinnamon, the same underlying libraries are powering everything, which makes sense.
What I hope is that Canonical has noted that most of its users have been fleeing to Mint, and that if it adopts GNOME 3, it doesn't just adopt GNOME Shell and call it a day - we want desktops. Canonical might be able to make GNOME Classic/Flashback/whatever it's called today work - right now it's pretty horrible, at least in its default configuration, but Canonical could be the company to fix that, just as Ubuntu's flavor of GNOME 2 was always just a little nicer than the default configuration you'd get in, say, Fedora or Debian.
Let us know! I generally really like WSL, and consider it an improvement on Cygwin, but I do miss the ability to type things like "cmd/c start." which in Cygwin gets Explorer to view the current directory, and in WSL... uh, well, doesn't;-)
I also hope symlinks work properly. If you ln -s/mnt/c/Users/userid/ ~/windows_user and cd to ~/windows_user it sort of works, but subsequent relative 'cds' don't - ie 'cd Documents' appears to work, but an ls shows you are still in C:\Users\userid
You talk like you want to waste your time playing with the DE instead of using
No, actually, I don't. What I want is an interface that fits what I need to do when I need it to do something. An interface that's oriented towards one way of doing things, that makes it a pain to, say, see two things at once, is not optimal.
Yes, it can have as many of a fixed number of virtual desktops as you want. Oh, you have 3x3 but you need 10? Better re-configure your virtual desktop setup to be 3x4 so you have 12. In Gnome 3, you just start using a new virtual desktop
It sounds to me like you want to waste time playing with the DE instead of using your computer.
No, in Gnome 3, there's an "Activities" view. If you touch the top-left corner or press that Windows key Microsoft got stuck on all keyboards nowadays, it suddenly takes all your windows on the current desktop and shows them in what's essentially a MacOS Expose view. If you then start typing, it starts searching through the command names, icon labels, and keywords associated with your applications, showing you the matching applications; if you hit the Enter key, it executes the first one, which is often the most-recent one you've run that's in the results.
That sounds so much better than clicking on the task bar to select a running application, on the shortcuts to start a new instance of something I use regularly, or quickly finding it in the start menu if it's not something I... wait a moment, that doesn't sound better at all!
Actually, we don't have Windows 8 here
I wasn't asking you if you used Windows 8 there, I was pointing out that Windows 8 is no longer current, having been supplanted with a version of Windows, Windows 10, that uses a classic desktop, so making comments about Classic Desktop declining in popularity as evidence that non-desktop environments rule the roost is, well, not smart.
It sounds exactly like you've never seen Gnome 3 or Windows 10. Maybe you're just full of shit.
Or maybe you are. Because, leaving aside the fact I can't tell if you're impressed or hate Windows 10 based upon your last two paragraphs, the fact is you're completely wrong about what people prefer: people want desktops. Why? They work. Sure, you can tell me you don't want them, because you've found half a dozen keyboard shortcuts that work great in GNOME 3 and make it almost usable, if you want to learn keyboard shortcuts rather than, you know, get work done. But for the rest of us, the desktop metaphor is intuitive. Windows are friendly ways to organize information on screen and usually "just work", and the great thing is when they don't initially, they're easily fixed. We like being able to launch terminals and browsers with one click, rather than type in search commands, and we like being able to find applications we don't use as often by looking in nice categorized lists, rather than trying to remember that the thing we use to edit images is called The Gimp.
For all of its faults, Unity didn't stray too far from that familiar desktop metaphor, but it strayed enough that ordinary users fled to distributions like Mint. They didn't go with GNOME 3, because GNOME 3 isn't what anyone has ever asked for. Except you, apparently. Congratulations! Somebody wrote a desktop environment just for you. Everyone else is using something else.
I'll try it again at some point when I can be bothered, but the situation as of just over a year ago was that editing the panels required installing a Firefox plug-in (that might have already been installed) and browsing extensions.gnome.org. That site is still up and running and still describes the same functionality, so I assume that it's still necessary - hopefully, you just haven't had to use it because you were satisfied with the default panels, I wasn't however.
Slashdot Mirror
In the Mozilla case, nobody was fired, and the thing that offended people was funding a hate campaign against homosexuals (describing them as a danger to children, for example), not "voting". Eich resigned, rightly, after realizing that his actions meant he was legitimately and fairly distrusted by a significant proportion of the community.
So he's not wrong, you are, on every single point.
That's very convenient. Someone is allowed to fund a hate campaign, with a view to getting the rights of blameless people curtailed, and that's fine and dandy because it's "legal", but those people aren't allowed to live their lives (and don't get the same protection) because of the actions of the first person.
I assume you're also against the boycott and campaign of United too? I mean, say what you like, but legally they were entitled to call the police, initiating the use of force, against a passenger who was the victim of their own fuck-up. They deserve to be "protected" from criticism and boycotts, right?
As far as BDSM goes it's actually relatively SFW: It's "lifestyle" domination (ie participants engage in it more or less all the time they're in contact with one another, rather than for sessions/dates that have a beginning and end), where men are (always) in charge, and there's some kind of strict hierarchy around women (who are always subservient to men and have only limited, or no, power.) The name comes from a series of books about "Gor", an erotic fantasy world where such a power dynamic existed.
It's not all nipple clamps and spankings in BDSM, it's a pretty diverse range of fetishes.
KDE would be absurd. Cinnamon is the obvious alternative, given like Unity and GNOME 3 it's built on the same underlying software stack, but uses the desktop metaphor that, ultimately, is the key feature that stopped people from embracing GNOME 3, and to a lesser extent Unity.
KDE also has historically had poor support under Ubuntu. Cinnamon was built for Ubuntu - that is, Mint - the base distribution from the same people - is Ubuntu + Cinnamon (or MATE)
No, it'll be some word that begins with [. [utthroat [heetah maybe?
I don't want to tar all boomers, obviously. But what's different about them compared to X and Millennials is that those boomers who "get it" with tech are looked down upon and treated as inferiors by the majority who don't. That's kinda changing, as they recognize they have no choice, but you hear the resentment.
And yes, I'm very grateful to people like Woz, Miner, and Haynie who wanted to create great tech things, and even to people like Jobs and Gates who recognized opportunities to make money from businesses desperate to manage increasingly more complex industries, helping mainstream computing in the process.
It was Generation X who first, as a generation, wholeheartedly embraced computing. We might not have done if great people like Jay Miner or Chuck Peddle hadn't cleared the way and produced some of the essential building blocks needed to make computing compelling, but we didn't have to worry about being ostracized by other members of our own generation - we "got" it.
Any Gen Xer or Millennial who says "Oh, I don't really know anything about computers, that's geek stuff" is very much out of place and a minority. That's the boomer mainstream for some reason - ignorant, and proud of it. It's frustrating.
Well, definitely more than the boomers that I regularly see that think they deserve double everyone else's salary for not knowing very basic "computery" things...
Oh come on, it's only been 20-25 years since Netscape introduced the problem by rendering pages as they loaded. Some bugs are difficult to fix! ;-)
(Or maybe they're fixing the bugs in reverse order, I mean, they just fixed the modal, window-switching, alert() problem after a similar period of time...)
No, he got crucified for saying that half of people don't pay any taxes, and that those people won't vote for him (plus something else I'll get to in a moment.)
Both are false. Everyone pays taxes - just not always income taxes. And given the people who are on low enough incomes that they don't pay income tax are disproportionately:
- Southern blue collar workers (no unions to raise their salaries)
- The military (have you seen the shitty wages they earn?)
- The elderly/retired
What was the other thing? Oh yeah, the reason it wasn't just stupid, it was offensive: he said "My job is not to care about these people".
He... doesn't care about people on low incomes.
Not really what the GP was saying at all. And obviously offensive and disqualifying comments if you're running for the President of the US - though perhaps not any more.
When you're living paycheck to paycheck, no, it is impractical to increase your 401k contributions.
I swear the average Slashdotter is a son of Trump or something - or at any rate has never experienced low incomes. Back in 1995, I actually got to the point that I couldn't eat for two days because I'd literally completely run out of money and food. I wasn't living extravagantly - a tiny black and white TV getting its signal via the antenna was my major entertainment, for example. No car. Cheap junk furniture.
I'm comfortable now, but it recently opened my eyes when I looked at the Wikipedia page of a city near where I live and found the median household income there is barely $20,000 a year. That, adjusted for inflation, is less than what I was earning in 1995 (ignoring inflation it's slightly higher.) That's household income - as in multiple people are trying to live from that money. I don't know how they do it, but I can pretty much guarantee they're not putting money into 401ks.
So you admit the customer has no choice here but to "accept" blatantly unfair terms and conditions that contradict the nature of the product being sold?
The other airport was four hours drive away, it's hard to believe they couldn't have resolved the issue by using a car. Even if they hired a taxi, the fare would have been lower than the compensation they were required to pay.
All available evidence says Dr Dao was telling the truth. USA Today (or a newspaper owned thereof) tried to do a hit piece on him this morning (no link, I'm not giving them clicks) where they pointed out he'd had his medical license suspended in the past due to issues with controlled drugs. As the article admits, the license was re-instated and he's a practicing doctor now.
(USA Today needs to understand that "He's no angel" stories only work when smearing black teenagers.)
Yes... but there's no incentive. Essentially the airline is allowed to say "No takers for $1,349? OK, well, in that case we're kicking off the four people we don't like the most, and they each get $1,350. Unless you paid less than 1/3 of that for your ticket, in which case we're giving you just 3x the value of your ticket (yeah, the limit isn't even $1,350, it's 3x the value of your ticket capped at $1,350.)
What baffles me is that United didn't even do that. Passengers said the largest offer they heard was in the hundreds.
Yes, they can offer more, but it's PR at that point. The law has been written to favor the airlines - which, incidentally, means that the apologists are sorta right, the entire thing was almost certainly legal. Not moral "because it's the law" as the apologists claim, just technically legal, and Mr Dao is probably screwed.
United had a moral obligation to solve its mistake peacefully. The fact it didn't, and the fact it's totally legal that it didn't, means we need to reform the law. End the cap: nobody should be forced to give up their seat on an overbooked flight.
That would be Chrysler, it's always being purchased...
If half of all new cars have some level of self driving ability in ten years, then it's highly unlikely the 25% threshold will be met. Most cars on the road aren't new, and we don't know what percentage of car users will use the self driving capabilities of the cars that have it. That said, Tesla plans to make the (mid-range) Model 3 self driving (with the firmware permitting the feature released later this year), so there's at least some chance that within 10 years virtually all new cars will have the feature.
It is. People living there receive more services, and businesses located there get more custom. And nobody's forced to use a mode of transportation they dislike - you're allowed to walk, you can take a bus or train, or you can drive. It's a win-win for everyone.
I love Ubuntu. I'm not a fan of Mir, largely because I don't agree that it is a reasonable replacement for X11. Nor is Wayland. Both essentially throw out the baby with the bathwater.
As a result, I don't recognize the criticism here. Mir isn't "mainstream", it never was. It was criticized from two angles, neither of which have anything to do with the kind of technological hipsterism Shuttleworth is claiming: Wayland advocates saw it as a rival project, and long time Unix/GNU+Linux users saw it as something that'd remove critical functionality they rely upon. It was never criticized for being mainstream - it was never mainstream!
Hyperloops will have similar, perhaps even worse, issues with legroom, nausea, and a lack of capacity, plus additional issues with noise, and that's if they're able to resolve the other issues.
A train, yeah. A small, cramped, windowless, probably noisy capsule in a tube, however, is another story, even if the journey time is substantially lower.
Hyperloop is just the latest development in making transportation even shittier.
I didn't like Unity, but I respected it, and found it to be usable - something GNOME Shell just isn't, not without a lot of work and a massive change in workflow and expectations anyway. Unity was a serious attempt to build a better desktop, but Canonical married itself to concepts before testing them in the real world, and I honestly think if they'd done more user testing, the dock wouldn't have been left in (not in that form anyway), and the "search for everything" model would have been dumped.
I wish they'd been successful, and in a contest between GNOME Shell and Unity, I wish they'd had have prevailed.
Alas Shuttleworth's comments suggest that, while they'll contribute to GNOME, it's unlikely they'll ship any improvements without the GNOME team's blessing. So this is a wholesale surrender to a failed, deeply unpopular, desktop, by a better alternative. It's very sad.
KDE missed its chance, and it's never felt to me like the designers really had much of a vision which means it's always been more of a kludge than GNOME - albeit right now, that makes it better than GNOME 3. Meanwhile whether you're using Unity, GNOME 3, or Cinnamon, the same underlying libraries are powering everything, which makes sense.
What I hope is that Canonical has noted that most of its users have been fleeing to Mint, and that if it adopts GNOME 3, it doesn't just adopt GNOME Shell and call it a day - we want desktops. Canonical might be able to make GNOME Classic/Flashback/whatever it's called today work - right now it's pretty horrible, at least in its default configuration, but Canonical could be the company to fix that, just as Ubuntu's flavor of GNOME 2 was always just a little nicer than the default configuration you'd get in, say, Fedora or Debian.
Let us know! I generally really like WSL, and consider it an improvement on Cygwin, but I do miss the ability to type things like "cmd /c start ." which in Cygwin gets Explorer to view the current directory, and in WSL... uh, well, doesn't ;-)
I also hope symlinks work properly. If you ln -s /mnt/c/Users/userid/ ~/windows_user and cd to ~/windows_user it sort of works, but subsequent relative 'cds' don't - ie 'cd Documents' appears to work, but an ls shows you are still in C:\Users\userid
It's not a crime for a government employee to post to Twitter while working. If it were, Trump would have been impeached multiple times by now.
No, actually, I don't. What I want is an interface that fits what I need to do when I need it to do something. An interface that's oriented towards one way of doing things, that makes it a pain to, say, see two things at once, is not optimal.
It sounds to me like you want to waste time playing with the DE instead of using your computer.
That sounds so much better than clicking on the task bar to select a running application, on the shortcuts to start a new instance of something I use regularly, or quickly finding it in the start menu if it's not something I... wait a moment, that doesn't sound better at all!
I wasn't asking you if you used Windows 8 there, I was pointing out that Windows 8 is no longer current, having been supplanted with a version of Windows, Windows 10, that uses a classic desktop, so making comments about Classic Desktop declining in popularity as evidence that non-desktop environments rule the roost is, well, not smart.
Or maybe you are. Because, leaving aside the fact I can't tell if you're impressed or hate Windows 10 based upon your last two paragraphs, the fact is you're completely wrong about what people prefer: people want desktops. Why? They work. Sure, you can tell me you don't want them, because you've found half a dozen keyboard shortcuts that work great in GNOME 3 and make it almost usable, if you want to learn keyboard shortcuts rather than, you know, get work done. But for the rest of us, the desktop metaphor is intuitive. Windows are friendly ways to organize information on screen and usually "just work", and the great thing is when they don't initially, they're easily fixed. We like being able to launch terminals and browsers with one click, rather than type in search commands, and we like being able to find applications we don't use as often by looking in nice categorized lists, rather than trying to remember that the thing we use to edit images is called The Gimp.
For all of its faults, Unity didn't stray too far from that familiar desktop metaphor, but it strayed enough that ordinary users fled to distributions like Mint. They didn't go with GNOME 3, because GNOME 3 isn't what anyone has ever asked for. Except you, apparently. Congratulations! Somebody wrote a desktop environment just for you. Everyone else is using something else.
There's no rumblings, Comcast's Wifi routers do, already, broadcast a separate WiFi signal (xfinitywifi)
It's actually a very useful service.
I'll try it again at some point when I can be bothered, but the situation as of just over a year ago was that editing the panels required installing a Firefox plug-in (that might have already been installed) and browsing extensions.gnome.org. That site is still up and running and still describes the same functionality, so I assume that it's still necessary - hopefully, you just haven't had to use it because you were satisfied with the default panels, I wasn't however.