.....some folks DO sound like frothing zealots after you hear "WHY" they use Linux or free software in general. Why? (I'm not singling you out by the way).
Well because at the end of the day its just software, code and computer programs. There really is no need for any one person to choose one side exclusively whether its all proprietary or all open source. The entire issue has been elevated by some to the level of a religious jihad. As if being a proprietary supporter is the same as being a Pro-Lifer and being an open source supporter is the same as being a Pro-Choicer. Software licensing just shouldn't be such a life or death issue for ANYONE.
There's an entire world out there of far more important issues to rally behind and fight for and even live and die for. When you find yourself having an "ideology" behind what kind of friggin software you use all I can think is the person in question has REALLY been sitting in front of their computer for too long and would really benefit from a sabbatical from technology.
1. Generals isn't out yet so wtf are you talking about.
2. " If they want this to catch on, they really need to port the server to Linux." Are you one of those folks who are so deluded that you actually think there is a large Linux gaming market out there?
It just occured to me that if Microsoft ever wants to stop the open source movement dead in its tracks, all they have to do is write a bunch of free Linux software, utilities. Small stuff like browsers, media players, disk utilities, but fill them periodically with spyware and big brother add ons. The open source community will get in such an uproar over the misuse of their "precious personal data" (that no one really cares about in the first place) that they'll spend all their time coding and hacking away to get rid of the spyware or create new apps altogether to replace what they had to give up. A sort of play on the paranoid neuroticism of the open source community itslef.
Yes I know but that doesn't go over my earlier statement as to how many employers do this. I don't even work in a techie job. How is this information being public or collected by any one agency harmful to the average citizen? You see none of what you've reported is illegal. And if I did do something illegal, I don't really have a right to hide it now do I?
Wouldn't I have to be using my full name instead of the nick NDPTAL85 in order for that to be a concern? Do you think I apply for jobs as NDPTAL85? And althought my full name can be found if one were to ego surf my nick the likelyhood of that happening in the real world for 99.99999999% of jobs is extremely low. Hell not even the CIA would do it.
Most techies don't work for software companies. The downturn was brought about because of shitty business plans not because of the prevelance of open source software. At the same time I still think there aren't enough qualified, truly qualified (emotionally as well as skill wise) people in the industry.
"- Whistleblowers and humans rights activists and oppressed people can use this to pass out information without getting shot or identified. There are parts of the world where complaining about your situation is a capital offence. Even is the "free" world, complaining about mistakes in a company can cost a job and your livelihood. (It is not "his friends" that he provides this facility for - so a large number of other people have also missed the point.)"
If these people are breaking the laws of te nations they reside in then I have no sympathies for their needs. Spam sucks and must be stopped at all costs.
Well if he wasn't such a paranoid fuck it wouldn't be a problem. I'm well aware of Carnivore and all that crap but since I'm not breaking the fucking law I don't have much of a problem with it.
Sometimes people have such a inflated sense of self worth that they consider themselves worthy of government attention when the government doesn't have a reason to be paying your boring ass any mind to begin with.
Why do people start projects they can't possibly finish or even maintain? He had to know he would need to get a job eventually. How many irrelevant distro's are going to be founded and then abandoned once the demands of time and real life creep in?
There's no need to throw the entire operating system out with the bath water simply because the default theme is not to your liking. That is however what Raskin suggests to do. It makes very little sense when its something you can change. The OS as a whole is extremely attractive from a feature point of view and now its completely perfect now that I'm running a theme I like.
Well not everyone agrees that OS X's UI is worse than what came before. Most Mac users are just fine with it and since it can be themed its again not that much of an issue. And considering the popularity of the Kalediscope themeing software for OS 8 thru 9 and the popularity of OS X themes for Windows I would say there were more folks who disliked "Platinum" than dislike "Aqua".
Re:And If I Don't Agree With Your Design Choices?
on
Jef Raskin Talks Skins
·
· Score: 1
Please, please, PLEASE do not think Raskin represents the Mac "approach". From Mac OS 8 to Mac OS X the GUI is themeable/skinnable. You can use multi button mice. You can do what you want really. Raskin is to GUI design what Steve Gibson is to computer security. A moron.
Re:And If I Don't Agree With Your Design Choices?
on
Jef Raskin Talks Skins
·
· Score: 1
I think what he is saying is that he knows whats best for HIM better than anyone or any company does. Can you disagree with that?
It doesn't matter if its a science or not. If people don't like the default interface then they just don't fucking like it. I myself use a Sosumi skin on OS X. Should I not do this because when I got to use someone else's OS X computer it may take me a few minutes to reacclimate myself? Thats an insane way to think.
Try again, only this time "think"
on
ULTra Robo-Taxi
·
· Score: 1
People are usually insulting when they hear something incredbily stupid.
Yes cars are inefficient but they get more and more efficient each year. A car made in the 1950's is 10 to 30 times more of a polluter than a car made today. Emmision standards go up, pollution levels per car go down. Add to that the continuing advances in fuel cell technology and this energy efficiency issue really won't be much of an issue for long.
Again, we're not the ones in our own little world. You are. It can be heard in your very tone. "over-indulgent upper class"? Where do you get off? What are we supposed to do? Feel guilty about our infrastructure and re-design our cities around silly little public transit vehicles that destroy the joy of owning your own car for whatever purpose you may want?
Try to pass this off on a regular woman. Show her a 50 page report in triplicate as to why driving sucks for all of humanity. Then see if you still have a date.
Forget even that. Sometimes people just drive around for hours with no particular destination in mind. Just driving to think or for relaxation. Is that a bad thing too? Should that not be done because it wastes gas and pollutes the air? I have 4 computers that I keep on 24/7 365 days a year. Want me to turn them off so we can save some more energy? How far am I going to have to alter my lifestyle to please guilt ridden saviours of the world like yourself?
Human beings have "desires". We're not logical Vulcans. Sometimes the things we want to do aren't the best choice environmentally, socially, economically....etc whatever. But thats just life. The way you deal with it is you engineer around the issue instead of eliminating it altogether. Cars are here to stay. How we will deal with them is by making them more efficient, less polluting and more economical. Not by replacing them with little pods that stop off at stations that may or may not be near where you want to go.
Because cars go exactly where you want them to
on
ULTra Robo-Taxi
·
· Score: 1
Duh. Is a train going to be able to pull up to the curb of whatever place you want to go? What about when you have to carry groceries or packages home? And what about dates? Do you think everyone will want to take their girlfriend/wife out on a date somewhere on the friggin train or bus? What about making out in the back seat? How do you do that on public transportation?
We already *know* that cars are inefficient and polluting but they so fit our lifestyle. No matter how good a public transit system is it can never take you "exactly" where you want to go 100% of the time. Then you factor in weather, who wants to wait for a bus or train in the snow? Cars do more than just get someone from point A to point B. Try to include the rest of us in your little world next time.
Someone else originally posted this comment in response to someone else but I thought it applies to you as well:
Hello, I'm pissed off that I have crazy views and no-one listens to me. Watch as I complain and act stupid! Ok, I'm going back to my Freedom Militia now.
Or maybe the public has just long ago grown up and dropped their silly idealism. No country have nucelar weapons? What do you expect every nation that currently has them to just get rid of them? The fact that you could even ponder such a thing makes one question your mental facilities. Its like saying all guns should disapear or something. You know thats impossible so even suggesting it is silly.
Well we can't import grain. That would destroy the domestic market for grain and well, the US being able to feed itself is a strategic advantage, not a financial one. Thats why we subsidize our own farmers.
Aside from that, I disagree with your disagreement.:) Global trade DOES help reduce income disparities and imbalances, but only when the target nations have the proper social and legal infrastructures ready to benefit from such trade. Financial infrastructure is necessary as well.
The US didn't get from agrarian to information based industries overnight. It took over 200 years. I don't see why its gonna be any less amount of time for other 3rd world countries. That does not mean global trade is bad because it doesn't cure and fix problems overnight. Its simply a good first step.
Slashdot Mirror
No problem. With the economy bouncing back it will be a year's delay at most till those iBooks are purchased.
.....some folks DO sound like frothing zealots after you hear "WHY" they use Linux or free software in general. Why? (I'm not singling you out by the way).
Well because at the end of the day its just software, code and computer programs. There really is no need for any one person to choose one side exclusively whether its all proprietary or all open source. The entire issue has been elevated by some to the level of a religious jihad. As if being a proprietary supporter is the same as being a Pro-Lifer and being an open source supporter is the same as being a Pro-Choicer. Software licensing just shouldn't be such a life or death issue for ANYONE.
There's an entire world out there of far more important issues to rally behind and fight for and even live and die for. When you find yourself having an "ideology" behind what kind of friggin software you use all I can think is the person in question has REALLY been sitting in front of their computer for too long and would really benefit from a sabbatical from technology.
Was Jeff Raskin an ex-boyfriend of yours or something?
1. Generals isn't out yet so wtf are you talking about.
2. " If they want this to catch on, they really need to port the server to Linux." Are you one of those folks who are so deluded that you actually think there is a large Linux gaming market out there?
It just occured to me that if Microsoft ever wants to stop the open source movement dead in its tracks, all they have to do is write a bunch of free Linux software, utilities. Small stuff like browsers, media players, disk utilities, but fill them periodically with spyware and big brother add ons. The open source community will get in such an uproar over the misuse of their "precious personal data" (that no one really cares about in the first place) that they'll spend all their time coding and hacking away to get rid of the spyware or create new apps altogether to replace what they had to give up. A sort of play on the paranoid neuroticism of the open source community itslef.
Yes I know but that doesn't go over my earlier statement as to how many employers do this. I don't even work in a techie job. How is this information being public or collected by any one agency harmful to the average citizen? You see none of what you've reported is illegal. And if I did do something illegal, I don't really have a right to hide it now do I?
Why should we and not you?
Wouldn't I have to be using my full name instead of the nick NDPTAL85 in order for that to be a concern? Do you think I apply for jobs as NDPTAL85? And althought my full name can be found if one were to ego surf my nick the likelyhood of that happening in the real world for 99.99999999% of jobs is extremely low. Hell not even the CIA would do it.
Most techies don't work for software companies. The downturn was brought about because of shitty business plans not because of the prevelance of open source software. At the same time I still think there aren't enough qualified, truly qualified (emotionally as well as skill wise) people in the industry.
"- Whistleblowers and humans rights activists and oppressed people can use this to pass out information without getting shot or identified. There are parts of the world where complaining about your situation is a capital offence. Even is the "free" world, complaining about mistakes in a company can cost a job and your livelihood. (It is not "his friends" that he provides this facility for - so a large number of other people have also missed the point.)"
If these people are breaking the laws of te nations they reside in then I have no sympathies for their needs. Spam sucks and must be stopped at all costs.
Well if he wasn't such a paranoid fuck it wouldn't be a problem. I'm well aware of Carnivore and all that crap but since I'm not breaking the fucking law I don't have much of a problem with it.
Sometimes people have such a inflated sense of self worth that they consider themselves worthy of government attention when the government doesn't have a reason to be paying your boring ass any mind to begin with.
Oh well to each his or her paranoid own.
Why do people start projects they can't possibly finish or even maintain? He had to know he would need to get a job eventually. How many irrelevant distro's are going to be founded and then abandoned once the demands of time and real life creep in?
There's no need to throw the entire operating system out with the bath water simply because the default theme is not to your liking. That is however what Raskin suggests to do. It makes very little sense when its something you can change. The OS as a whole is extremely attractive from a feature point of view and now its completely perfect now that I'm running a theme I like.
Usability is overrated. If I don't like what I'm looking at then it doesn't matter how "usable" it is. I simply won't be using it.
Well not everyone agrees that OS X's UI is worse than what came before. Most Mac users are just fine with it and since it can be themed its again not that much of an issue. And considering the popularity of the Kalediscope themeing software for OS 8 thru 9 and the popularity of OS X themes for Windows I would say there were more folks who disliked "Platinum" than dislike "Aqua".
Please, please, PLEASE do not think Raskin represents the Mac "approach". From Mac OS 8 to Mac OS X the GUI is themeable/skinnable. You can use multi button mice. You can do what you want really. Raskin is to GUI design what Steve Gibson is to computer security. A moron.
I think what he is saying is that he knows whats best for HIM better than anyone or any company does. Can you disagree with that?
It doesn't matter if its a science or not. If people don't like the default interface then they just don't fucking like it. I myself use a Sosumi skin on OS X. Should I not do this because when I got to use someone else's OS X computer it may take me a few minutes to reacclimate myself? Thats an insane way to think.
People are usually insulting when they hear something incredbily stupid.
Yes cars are inefficient but they get more and more efficient each year. A car made in the 1950's is 10 to 30 times more of a polluter than a car made today. Emmision standards go up, pollution levels per car go down. Add to that the continuing advances in fuel cell technology and this energy efficiency issue really won't be much of an issue for long.
Again, we're not the ones in our own little world. You are. It can be heard in your very tone. "over-indulgent upper class"? Where do you get off? What are we supposed to do? Feel guilty about our infrastructure and re-design our cities around silly little public transit vehicles that destroy the joy of owning your own car for whatever purpose you may want?
Try to pass this off on a regular woman. Show her a 50 page report in triplicate as to why driving sucks for all of humanity. Then see if you still have a date.
Forget even that. Sometimes people just drive around for hours with no particular destination in mind. Just driving to think or for relaxation. Is that a bad thing too? Should that not be done because it wastes gas and pollutes the air? I have 4 computers that I keep on 24/7 365 days a year. Want me to turn them off so we can save some more energy? How far am I going to have to alter my lifestyle to please guilt ridden saviours of the world like yourself?
Human beings have "desires". We're not logical Vulcans. Sometimes the things we want to do aren't the best choice environmentally, socially, economically....etc whatever. But thats just life. The way you deal with it is you engineer around the issue instead of eliminating it altogether. Cars are here to stay. How we will deal with them is by making them more efficient, less polluting and more economical. Not by replacing them with little pods that stop off at stations that may or may not be near where you want to go.
Duh. Is a train going to be able to pull up to the curb of whatever place you want to go? What about when you have to carry groceries or packages home? And what about dates? Do you think everyone will want to take their girlfriend/wife out on a date somewhere on the friggin train or bus? What about making out in the back seat? How do you do that on public transportation?
We already *know* that cars are inefficient and polluting but they so fit our lifestyle. No matter how good a public transit system is it can never take you "exactly" where you want to go 100% of the time. Then you factor in weather, who wants to wait for a bus or train in the snow? Cars do more than just get someone from point A to point B. Try to include the rest of us in your little world next time.
Someone else originally posted this comment in response to someone else but I thought it applies to you as well:
Hello, I'm pissed off that I have crazy views and no-one listens to me. Watch as I complain and act stupid! Ok, I'm going back to my Freedom Militia now.
Or maybe the public has just long ago grown up and dropped their silly idealism. No country have nucelar weapons? What do you expect every nation that currently has them to just get rid of them? The fact that you could even ponder such a thing makes one question your mental facilities. Its like saying all guns should disapear or something. You know thats impossible so even suggesting it is silly.
Hey could you let us know what is as interesting as violence and sex? You seem to know from your tone of voice....
Then enjoy it and have fun!
Well we can't import grain. That would destroy the domestic market for grain and well, the US being able to feed itself is a strategic advantage, not a financial one. Thats why we subsidize our own farmers.
:) Global trade DOES help reduce income disparities and imbalances, but only when the target nations have the proper social and legal infrastructures ready to benefit from such trade. Financial infrastructure is necessary as well.
Aside from that, I disagree with your disagreement.
The US didn't get from agrarian to information based industries overnight. It took over 200 years. I don't see why its gonna be any less amount of time for other 3rd world countries. That does not mean global trade is bad because it doesn't cure and fix problems overnight. Its simply a good first step.