A wonder drug that can stop thousands of different species of bacteria dead in their tracks. Quite something. Almost miraculous, really. Certainly would have seemed that way if you asked a doctor two hundred years ago.
Miraculous would be if the doctor actually acknowledged the existence of bacterias. Getting him into believe in a wonder cure would be the least of your problem.
Abu Simbel were rescued by swedish companies AB Vattenbyggnadsbyrån and SENTAB commissioned by the UN, or more precise UNESCO.
The excavations of Assur has all but stopped since the Gulf war. Partly because of the hardening of Iraqi oppression, partly because there is no money to pay for excavation
Even in the free west churches were many times built over and on top of archeologically remarkable sites.
God set the rules that the Universe plays by and the Universe went and played by those rules... if God did not set the rules, who/what did? And since something must have set those rules, then couldn't that something be considered to be God?
Two points. The argument above condense into a tautology. God must have set conditions because there are conditions set by God (as you say, the setter of conditions can be considered being God). This is a very elegant statement since it uses itself to prove itself. This of course also make it totally worthless.
And, if we consider the above statement as being true. Isn't the "setter of conditions" quite far from the Christian or the biblical god. This to me seems to be more of the old Theist belief than anything else.
... I think the christian god is incompatible with modern science, but that is what I think, and as I can't prove it, I might very well be wrong...
Am I missing something, or is Sweden one of those country's who's "civlization_by_conquest" events were so far back in time that they're either prehistorical or, at least, solidly the Romans' fault?
No, Sweden was never conquered by the romans nor civilized by conquering (though perhabs indirectly by the romans). Sweden where civilized by cooperation by the ethnic swedes working together with sápmis and (by lacking other term) ethnic finns. Although this is an oversimplification, the following is mostly indisputable.
Problems with the right to the land of the sápmi started during the 1920s when swedish government claimed right to ancient sápmi land and tried to refuse nomad passage of sápmi between Sweden and Norway. A right which was covered in a treatise in the 1600 by swedish and norwegian government (Intrestingly, the only government of the 1900:s who have honoured that ancient right of the sápmi is that of Nazi-germany, those evil gits;-[).
Still to this day, there is a large dispute around the land Sápmi, of which many swedes are unknowing. And to those I would like to say, sweep before your own doorway...
You're reading a statement into my post that I simply isn't there. I never stated anything about any of the native american tribes, nor would I intend to.
No you didn't. But you did indirectly state that there was no law and order in America before1700 or so. Something which I think is clearly wrong.
As for paganism, my bad, but I didn't think my english was bad enough for anyone being able to think that I think paganism = the concept of people working together for a common good. I just oppose the common opinion that the concept of people working together for a common good is something inherited from the ancient greek and heritage of western civilization, it's not.
Also, by the way, no, Sweden's history as a "nation" is not prehistory and the Scandinavian countries mistreatments of the aboriginals exists in modern times.
What's interesting about that? Americans have been doing that since, oh, 1700 or so.
Something those pagan redskins would never do, or what?
The parent post was propably posted in a hurry, but this thing really pisses me off. And yes I'm a european (swedish) and a lawyer and seen this exact argument used against our aborigines (the sápmi) to which we 'brung' law and order. As if they didn't hav any...
Speaking of versions that never were, are you old enough to remember that Windows was originally supposed to be DOS4?
Short answer: No.
Long answer: My first contact with the PC where around the time when DOS 5 was the latest and greatest. And was it great? It even supported filesystems larger than 40MB.
Don't forget that NT was originally supposed to be OS/2 3
Actually NT was supposed to be OS/2 2. MS however cancelled those plans when Windows 3.0 became a huge success. Instead they decided to make NT more of a "windows". IBM then went on and release OS/2 2 by itself.
As for the portability of OS/2. There used to be a version running on the CHRP (or PReP or whatever) powerpc platform, so the codebase can't be that tied to the x86. Nor can it be said it piggybacked NT (which of course also ran on the ppc).
Mac OS X (and Darwin) is based on a Mach derivative, and it has always supported large hard disks. It also supports booting off a network or a firewire- or USB-attached hard disk. If GNU's Mach microkernel can't do these things, it leads me to question the viability of GNU Mach (and I don't know if GNU Mach can do these things - it very well might, but I'm willing to bet karma that it can't).
Isn't MacOS X's ability to boot via firewire, network etc, a side effect of using Apples (and Suns) excellent firmware, and not an inherent ability of the micro-kernel?
From looking in at this from way out here on the edges I think you may be approaching the problem with the political setup. FreeBSD seems to have set up a republic of sorts without a president. Could you imagine what the US government would be like if only the congress were involved with making laws? No president, no supreme court. The entire system would be brought to a screeching halt, bogged down in committe. That, or whomever was enjoying the majority for the moment would be distorting all the laws one way or the other. It's just not a pretty picture.
Wasn't that the point with the US system, borrowed from Montesqieue. Three separate entities of power, where laws would have to pass through all three, therefore braking the law-making process and preserve status quo?
Honestly countries without president seems to manage just as fine as countries with systems similar to the US...
IAL, and no, your grammar checker about passive voice, because your example sentence isn't really in passive voice! It's more like a copula-sentence were "was" is a copula, and "shut down properly" is a rection. And please, this has nothing to do with goatse.
Also, as well as your sentence, this reply could propably be written more "simple", as could this answer!
GNOME tends to start esd for sound. So open a terminal and do a ps ax and kill esd, or even easier do a "killall esd" and be set. A more elegant solution would be to open the GNOME control-panel and disable the sound server (esd).
Also, you can propably make arts (KDE) pipe the sound to esd, not sure about this one though...
Re:X kicks ass, XFree86 doubly so.
on
XFree86 10 Years Old
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
So? The point remains that it's significantly slower than other windowing systems that aren't network transparant.
Well, no;-). As I said the slowness seem to be in the component-libraries of the major desktop environment. This has nothing to do with X. X apps which do not use these services run fine and fast. Even though they use Qt or GTK+. As I said, the slowness isn't on part of X or the toolkit.
Actually KDE and GNOME would surely suffer from the same slowness in startup times even if implented (sp?) on Windows (the horror).
Then, of course, there's the utter lack of standardized widgets for doing just about anything. Which is where kparts, gtk, etc. come in.
GTK+ and Qt provides widgets, neither of these are slow if used as widgetlibrary, on the contrary, especially GTK is plenty fast. Qt suffer some from the gcc C++ linker.
But it's a sad statement that a GUI that is WELL over 10 years old (X11 predates XFree86) is just starting to get some decent standardized widgets (sorry, no, CDE, OpenWindows, Motif, etc. didn't cut the mustard even when they were new).
If only you weren't right...
Seriously what the various _UNIX_ desktop environments lack compared to Windows is a speedy component architecture. This is as stated above and in previous post not dependant on X. X handles the display and only the display. What the applications actually do behind the scenes are of no interest for X. Only what they display.
And with a well setup accelerated display, you shouldn't be suffering from artifacts or flickering.
On the problem of server for X, why do many seem to think the framebuffer would be better supported? I have no experience coding X-servers, nor any experience coding framebuffer support, so I ask: why should any one of those be easier? Enlighten me!
Re:X kicks ass, XFree86 doubly so.
on
XFree86 10 Years Old
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
But first, someone has to implement even rudimentary hardware acceleration into the framebuffer.
Then someone would start to complain about lackine network transparency.
Come on, X is here now, and it works beautifully! Nor is it slow, as seen by the mailer Sylpheed, or Dillo. Or Qt Designer. It's obvious that the perceived slowness of X lies neither in the toolkits or the windowing system, but somewhere else.
For KDE and GNOME that slowness rather stems from the kparts/bonobo component architectures
BeFS was/is essentialy a database, which in conjunction with features like extended attributes will allow you to store your mail as files in a folder (actually any folder). The same can be done w/ mp3:s where you can store the ID3 tag as file attributes.
All this makes for lightning fast search of mail, mp3:s etc because it's all in the FS, there is no need for looking at the actually contents of a file.
So now, do not say a database as a file system will not be to any use for the consumer...
And, oh, ReiserFS seems to be heading this way too...
Sounds like the Microsoft we know. Only M$ can make money. We can be sure what they mean by liberal is that they can comercialize anything they want and lock out the orignials. Like winsock.
Yeah, you got a point, but talking about winsock and TCP/IP stacks, you wouldn't complain if Linux came without?
OR if Windows still didn't include one, wouldn't you bash it for not having one?
I Admit there are lots of dubious business practices going on in Redmond, but _please_, just ponder a second before bashing MS like this.
I'm wondering just how much exactly they spent on this study just to find out that comic books are in fact based on real society?
Actually you've just showed why research is necessary... Youd did this by falling into the most common of traps, that is: what's obvious is true.
I think most useful research is actually this, researching the obvious, because when things are obvious, you don't look for an explanation, because things couldn't be any other way than they are, because it's obvious.
What I mean is, people don't look for an explanation for something that is clearly spelled in their face. They don't even think about why or how it could be otherwise...
to own property as evidenced by the people of Tibet "No, that's our country"
Though I can't defend the Chinese occupation of Tibet, I seem to remember that Tibet has been a part of China since the 13th century. And that a free Tibet was really a historical "exception". IE Tibet was free for just a short time.
But of course by the same reasons as given above Finland should still be considered a part of Sweden. But as also said I really won't defend the occupation of Tibet.
That is such an illogical and poor analogy that
I hardly know where to start...
Well, obviously you did... As for an answer:
Not removing now closed relays from the list is like not releasing prisoners from jail. Something which might or might not be a good idea...
Also, I think the usefulness of DBs like ORBD lies in them staying current, as I think it might cost more losing one important mail than wading through tons of spam.
I really too should point out that I, for myself favours strict filtering of mail(servers), the reason being I'd rather miss out something not so important that most of my mails are, than d/l spam. Though I think this might not be true for others. You (fmaxell) seem to reason along the same lines as I do, but are you sure others do?
Of course, they do! otherwise it wouldn't exist services as ORBD!;-)
Slashdot Mirror
A wonder drug that can stop thousands of different species of bacteria dead in their tracks. Quite something. Almost miraculous, really. Certainly would have seemed that way if you asked a doctor two hundred years ago.
Miraculous would be if the doctor actually acknowledged the existence of bacterias. Getting him into believe in a wonder cure would be the least of your problem.
Well, that's the RISC you run...
Then of course, everything would be easier if the hardware manufacturers also sent along a DOS bootdisk, perhaps with FreeDOS to avoid licensing fees.
WHAT! Romanes eunt domus!
Should read "romani ite domum", now write that a hundred times before sunrise or I'll cut your balls of!
Hell Caesar (duck and run for cover)
After owning my share of french cars, I have to agree...
Two points. The argument above condense into a tautology. God must have set conditions because there are conditions set by God (as you say, the setter of conditions can be considered being God). This is a very elegant statement since it uses itself to prove itself. This of course also make it totally worthless.
And, if we consider the above statement as being true. Isn't the "setter of conditions" quite far from the Christian or the biblical god. This to me seems to be more of the old Theist belief than anything else.
No, Sweden was never conquered by the romans nor civilized by conquering (though perhabs indirectly by the romans). Sweden where civilized by cooperation by the ethnic swedes working together with sápmis and (by lacking other term) ethnic finns. Although this is an oversimplification, the following is mostly indisputable.
Problems with the right to the land of the sápmi started during the 1920s when swedish government claimed right to ancient sápmi land and tried to refuse nomad passage of sápmi between Sweden and Norway. A right which was covered in a treatise in the 1600 by swedish and norwegian government (Intrestingly, the only government of the 1900:s who have honoured that ancient right of the sápmi is that of Nazi-germany, those evil gits ;-[).
Still to this day, there is a large dispute around the land Sápmi, of which many swedes are unknowing. And to those I would like to say, sweep before your own doorway...
You're reading a statement into my post that I simply isn't there. I never stated anything about any of the native american tribes, nor would I intend to.
No you didn't. But you did indirectly state that there was no law and order in America before1700 or so. Something which I think is clearly wrong.
As for paganism, my bad, but I didn't think my english was bad enough for anyone being able to think that I think paganism = the concept of people working together for a common good. I just oppose the common opinion that the concept of people working together for a common good is something inherited from the ancient greek and heritage of western civilization, it's not.
Also, by the way, no, Sweden's history as a "nation" is not prehistory and the Scandinavian countries mistreatments of the aboriginals exists in modern times.
Oh yes...
Something those pagan redskins would never do, or what?
The parent post was propably posted in a hurry, but this thing really pisses me off. And yes I'm a european (swedish) and a lawyer and seen this exact argument used against our aborigines (the sápmi) to which we 'brung' law and order. As if they didn't hav any...
Short answer: No.
Long answer: My first contact with the PC where around the time when DOS 5 was the latest and greatest. And was it great? It even supported filesystems larger than 40MB.
Actually NT was supposed to be OS/2 2. MS however cancelled those plans when Windows 3.0 became a huge success. Instead they decided to make NT more of a "windows". IBM then went on and release OS/2 2 by itself.
As for the portability of OS/2. There used to be a version running on the CHRP (or PReP or whatever) powerpc platform, so the codebase can't be that tied to the x86. Nor can it be said it piggybacked NT (which of course also ran on the ppc).
Oh, the spoiled kids of today...When I was young we didn't have those fancy Ones. All we had was Zeroes, and even then we had to use capital o.
...and find out my gf was in a car accident...
;-)
Nah, is this all hypothetical? You are a slashdot reader, how could you possibly have a gf...
Isn't MacOS X's ability to boot via firewire, network etc, a side effect of using Apples (and Suns) excellent firmware, and not an inherent ability of the micro-kernel?
From looking in at this from way out here on the edges I think you may be approaching the problem with the political setup. FreeBSD seems to have set up a republic of sorts without a president. Could you imagine what the US government would be like if only the congress were involved with making laws? No president, no supreme court. The entire system would be brought to a screeching halt, bogged down in committe. That, or whomever was enjoying the majority for the moment would be distorting all the laws one way or the other. It's just not a pretty picture.
Wasn't that the point with the US system, borrowed from Montesqieue. Three separate entities of power, where laws would have to pass through all three, therefore braking the law-making process and preserve status quo?
Honestly countries without president seems to manage just as fine as countries with systems similar to the US...
IAL, and no, your grammar checker about passive voice, because your example sentence isn't really in passive voice! It's more like a copula-sentence were "was" is a copula, and "shut down properly" is a rection. And please, this has nothing to do with goatse.
Also, as well as your sentence, this reply could propably be written more "simple", as could this answer!
GNOME tends to start esd for sound. So open a terminal and do a ps ax and kill esd, or even easier do a "killall esd" and be set. A more elegant solution would be to open the GNOME control-panel and disable the sound server (esd).
Also, you can propably make arts (KDE) pipe the sound to esd, not sure about this one though...
So? The point remains that it's significantly slower than other windowing systems that aren't network transparant.
;-). As I said the slowness seem to be in the component-libraries of the major desktop environment. This has nothing to do with X. X apps which do not use these services run fine and fast. Even though they use Qt or GTK+. As I said, the slowness isn't on part of X or the toolkit.
Well, no
Actually KDE and GNOME would surely suffer from the same slowness in startup times even if implented (sp?) on Windows (the horror).
Then, of course, there's the utter lack of standardized widgets for doing just about anything. Which is where kparts, gtk, etc. come in.
GTK+ and Qt provides widgets, neither of these are slow if used as widgetlibrary, on the contrary, especially GTK is plenty fast. Qt suffer some from the gcc C++ linker.
But it's a sad statement that a GUI that is WELL over 10 years old (X11 predates XFree86) is just starting to get some decent standardized widgets (sorry, no, CDE, OpenWindows, Motif, etc. didn't cut the mustard even when they were new).
If only you weren't right...
Seriously what the various _UNIX_ desktop environments lack compared to Windows is a speedy component architecture. This is as stated above and in previous post not dependant on X. X handles the display and only the display. What the applications actually do behind the scenes are of no interest for X. Only what they display.
And with a well setup accelerated display, you shouldn't be suffering from artifacts or flickering.
On the problem of server for X, why do many seem to think the framebuffer would be better supported? I have no experience coding X-servers, nor any experience coding framebuffer support, so I ask: why should any one of those be easier? Enlighten me!
But first, someone has to implement even rudimentary hardware acceleration into the framebuffer.
Then someone would start to complain about lackine network transparency.
Come on, X is here now, and it works beautifully! Nor is it slow, as seen by the mailer Sylpheed, or Dillo. Or Qt Designer. It's obvious that the perceived slowness of X lies neither in the toolkits or the windowing system, but somewhere else.
For KDE and GNOME that slowness rather stems from the kparts/bonobo component architectures
BeFS...
BeFS was/is essentialy a database, which in conjunction with features like extended attributes will allow you to store your mail as files in a folder (actually any folder). The same can be done w/ mp3:s where you can store the ID3 tag as file attributes.
All this makes for lightning fast search of mail, mp3:s etc because it's all in the FS, there is no need for looking at the actually contents of a file.
So now, do not say a database as a file system will not be to any use for the consumer...
And, oh, ReiserFS seems to be heading this way too...
Yeah, you got a point, but talking about winsock and TCP/IP stacks, you wouldn't complain if Linux came without?
OR if Windows still didn't include one, wouldn't you bash it for not having one?
I Admit there are lots of dubious business practices going on in Redmond, but _please_, just ponder a second before bashing MS like this.
I'm wondering just how much exactly they spent on this study just to find out that comic books are in fact based on real society?
Actually you've just showed why research is necessary... Youd did this by falling into the most common of traps, that is: what's obvious is true.
I think most useful research is actually this, researching the obvious, because when things are obvious, you don't look for an explanation, because things couldn't be any other way than they are, because it's obvious.
What I mean is, people don't look for an explanation for something that is clearly spelled in their face. They don't even think about why or how it could be otherwise...
Though I can't defend the Chinese occupation of Tibet, I seem to remember that Tibet has been a part of China since the 13th century. And that a free Tibet was really a historical "exception". IE Tibet was free for just a short time.
But of course by the same reasons as given above Finland should still be considered a part of Sweden. But as also said I really won't defend the occupation of Tibet.
That is such an illogical and poor analogy that
;-)
I hardly know where to start...
Well, obviously you did... As for an answer:
Not removing now closed relays from the list is like not releasing prisoners from jail. Something which might or might not be a good idea...
Also, I think the usefulness of DBs like ORBD lies in them staying current, as I think it might cost more losing one important mail than wading through tons of spam.
I really too should point out that I, for myself favours strict filtering of mail(servers), the reason being I'd rather miss out something not so important that most of my mails are, than d/l spam. Though I think this might not be true for others. You (fmaxell) seem to reason along the same lines as I do, but are you sure others do?
Of course, they do! otherwise it wouldn't exist services as ORBD!