I'm not sure that's fair. The argument was not that KDE has better language bindings than GNOME, just that KDE has good language bindings -- which it does. That GNOME has more is excellent, but that doesn't make KDE "weak in this area".
The job of the kernel of any operating system is surely to make the hardware differences a non-issue? If it's a standard application accessing standard hardware, every operating system (Windows, Linux, Mac) abstracts the hardware to a point where it doesn't matter what it's running on.
Are any of these people working for a high-security governmental organisation? The assertion made in the original derrogatory article was that dubious binaries would be run by governments.
Erm no. To initially add a new process to the scheduler list takes longer (which is what the parent said); however once it's added it can be accessed in the same time regardless of the total size of the list. So it takes slightly longer to start the process, however once it's started the scheduler takes the same amount of time to do its work regardless of the total number of processes running, hence O(1)
This is just demonstrating the universal tradeoff in algorithm design: faster add vs faster access (see INSERT vs SELECT in DBs)
I think you're right; in fact further I think the meaning of "bloat" has been warped to mean "big". The two are not the same thing. MS Office is bloated - it's got bigger and bigger with each release for a relatively small increase in the number of features.
Even if we agreed that KDE was bloated; it would not become less bloated just by halving the number of applications.
OpenOffice on the other hand, while still bloated overall, I feel has reduced the bloat and yet added more features. KDE is the same. The developers have definitely trimmed the fat off it even within the 3.1 series of realeases.
Maybe we need some sort of metric for bloat: Lines of code per feature; Megabytes per menu; shared libraries per eye candy...
Are you sure that it's not that most studies show that parenting has very little effect on psychos?
I've heard this sort of thing before and my reaction is always the same -- think of the responsible adults you know. Count all of those with a screwed up upbringing. They will be the exception rather than the rule.
Do you seriously think the KDE developers didn't notice the broken, boring qualities of the code name. I believe it's a pun on the LOTR place named brockenboring. And with it being an alpha, brokenboring is bound to be apt.
Let's not mod people funny for just paraphrasing a joke.
These bloody little girls with their door-to-door cookie sales force, their road side lemonade counters. CORPORATE SELL OUTS! An underground copyright violation network is only the beginning; these mafiosos in the making will soon move to extortion and racketeering like the big boys (SCO).
"Fair use" applies to educational, public service and related applications and does not justify commercial misappropriation. Books and Internet sites intended and authorized for the purpose of teaching and other non-commercial use cannot be copied for commercial use.
This is a sneaky bit of double speak. While it is true that books cannot be copied verbatim (regardless of whether they are for commercial use or not) the knowledge contained in them most certainly can. If I read a maths book, I am entitled to use what I learned in any way I choose and do not owe the author anything other than perhaps a thank you.
No, not like using ln. Making a symbolic link requires that I've already anticpated that someone needs a file in a different path. This, in effect, removes the tree structure and makes every filesystem object just a series of interconnected nodes. Have a read of Hans Reiser's whitepaper on the subject. I was most impressed.
pgsql-bugs ( at ) postgresql ( dot ) org writes: > The problem occurs for new data types: > When pg_dump is called, sometimes the CREATE TYPE is dumped before > input/output functions are dumped. This makes a restore impossible.
I believe this was fixed about two weeks ago. Are you sure you are using 7.1 final release, not some beta version?
If it is then your attack on postgresql seems a little unfair.
Got a link? What version did you experience that in? I have had a problem with the restores before but I don't think it was that. The problem I had was that the extra stuff that gets added to template0 gets backed up as well. That means that when you try to do a restore you get loads of errors that things already exist. The solution is to use template1 as the basis for the target of the restore, which really is the empty database.
I personally like the way reiserfs is roadmapped. If I understand it correctly it will be a superset of existing filesystems. That is/home/myname/documents/report/2003/ will still work, but then so will/documents/reports/2003/myname; and so on.
Multiple paths to the same object seems perfect to me.
I'm hoping that you are a bit out of date, pgdumpall works fine for me. Since about 7.1 it's done large objects as well. I'm a bit worried that it's not working fine for me and I'm living an illusion. What exactly does it not back up reliably?
99% of ten million office users don't though. That means 9.9 million people don't need that feature. So the point is absolutely valid. Why do those 9.9 million people have to pay for upgrades that only one hundred thousand people use?
I can't say a bad thing about postgresql; this was really the only thing I felt the need for. For anyone who hasn't tried it you really should. Although I don't want to start a MySQL v postgresql flamewar, after trying both I think that postgres has the edge. Mysql was undisputably easier to work with and (at the time) was faster. PostgreSQL has moved on at a much faster rate though. In particular postgresql has solid support for transactions, large objects, subselects, object oriented tables. I'm convinced that if you use databases long enough you'll want every last one of these and won't be able to do without.
The professor compares the internet to the human body. I think he's incorrect in this. In the case of a human body - if you get a virus that you have no way of defeating, you die. Better would be to compare the internet with a population. A really nasy biological virus will wipe out a large portion of the population, but hopefully the diversity of the population will mean that someone will have an immunity or at least be capable of creating one, and that immunity will then spread through the population using the standard principles of natural selection. This is a good argument for keeping the diversity of computer systems connected to the internet high.
Imagine that every IP on the internet is running Windows. Now imagine a really nasty worm that exploits an, as yet unpatched, hole. The whole internet dies almost instantly. However, if the population is diverse then only a percentage is lost and the remainder can be used to rebuild those losses.
As much as I hate to say it, we're going to have to keep Windows around for operation "Human Shield".
This is in fact leveraging a monopoly. As you rightly say - they have no monopoly on instant messaging; they do have an OS monopoly and are using it (as usual) to obtain a monopoly in instant messaging.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not sure that's fair. The argument was not that KDE has better language bindings than GNOME, just that KDE has good language bindings -- which it does. That GNOME has more is excellent, but that doesn't make KDE "weak in this area".
The job of the kernel of any operating system is surely to make the hardware differences a non-issue? If it's a standard application accessing standard hardware, every operating system (Windows, Linux, Mac) abstracts the hardware to a point where it doesn't matter what it's running on.
Are any of these people working for a high-security governmental organisation? The assertion made in the original derrogatory article was that dubious binaries would be run by governments.
This problem has been in existence forever - how can it be that C compilers can be written in C? (Hint: the first one wasn't)
Erm no. To initially add a new process to the scheduler list takes longer (which is what the parent said); however once it's added it can be accessed in the same time regardless of the total size of the list. So it takes slightly longer to start the process, however once it's started the scheduler takes the same amount of time to do its work regardless of the total number of processes running, hence O(1)
This is just demonstrating the universal tradeoff in algorithm design: faster add vs faster access (see INSERT vs SELECT in DBs)
I like the sound of this! if, by faulting his arguments, i prove that his views fall short of optimal, will you be more impressed by my views?
Yes. What other method is there?
I'm not sure that's true. The filtering would be best performed on the envelope address. This would obviously leave the from: header address in tact.
I think you're right; in fact further I think the meaning of "bloat" has been warped to mean "big". The two are not the same thing. MS Office is bloated - it's got bigger and bigger with each release for a relatively small increase in the number of features.
Even if we agreed that KDE was bloated; it would not become less bloated just by halving the number of applications.
OpenOffice on the other hand, while still bloated overall, I feel has reduced the bloat and yet added more features. KDE is the same. The developers have definitely trimmed the fat off it even within the 3.1 series of realeases.
Maybe we need some sort of metric for bloat: Lines of code per feature; Megabytes per menu; shared libraries per eye candy...
ISO9660 is not writable in any useful sense.
CDs use multiple sessions to change previous writes.
CD-RW's get completely blanked before reuse.
Maybe that UDF filesystem would work though?
And in all those times you read the book, your spelling of "oroki" never once appeared on a page. Weird.
See them wonder as I expertly map my linux registry to the filesystem:
/etc
cd
"Marvellous", they cried, "see how he manipulates registry entries as if they were files"
Are you sure that it's not that most studies show that parenting has very little effect on psychos?
I've heard this sort of thing before and my reaction is always the same -- think of the responsible adults you know. Count all of those with a screwed up upbringing. They will be the exception rather than the rule.
-1 Bleedin' obvious
Do you seriously think the KDE developers didn't notice the broken, boring qualities of the code name. I believe it's a pun on the LOTR place named brockenboring. And with it being an alpha, brokenboring is bound to be apt.
Let's not mod people funny for just paraphrasing a joke.
These bloody little girls with their door-to-door cookie sales force, their road side lemonade counters. CORPORATE SELL OUTS! An underground copyright violation network is only the beginning; these mafiosos in the making will soon move to extortion and racketeering like the big boys (SCO).
"Fair use" applies to educational, public service and related applications and does not justify commercial misappropriation. Books and Internet sites intended and authorized for the purpose of teaching and other non-commercial use cannot be copied for commercial use.
This is a sneaky bit of double speak. While it is true that books cannot be copied verbatim (regardless of whether they are for commercial use or not) the knowledge contained in them most certainly can. If I read a maths book, I am entitled to use what I learned in any way I choose and do not owe the author anything other than perhaps a thank you.
No, not like using ln. Making a symbolic link requires that I've already anticpated that someone needs a file in a different path. This, in effect, removes the tree structure and makes every filesystem object just a series of interconnected nodes. Have a read of Hans Reiser's whitepaper on the subject. I was most impressed.
If it is then your attack on postgresql seems a little unfair.
Got a link? What version did you experience that in? I have had a problem with the restores before but I don't think it was that. The problem I had was that the extra stuff that gets added to template0 gets backed up as well. That means that when you try to do a restore you get loads of errors that things already exist. The solution is to use template1 as the basis for the target of the restore, which really is the empty database.
I personally like the way reiserfs is roadmapped. If I understand it correctly it will be a superset of existing filesystems. That is /home/myname/documents/report/2003/ will still work, but then so will /documents/reports/2003/myname; and so on.
Multiple paths to the same object seems perfect to me.
I'm hoping that you are a bit out of date, pgdumpall works fine for me. Since about 7.1 it's done large objects as well. I'm a bit worried that it's not working fine for me and I'm living an illusion. What exactly does it not back up reliably?
99% of ten million office users don't though. That means 9.9 million people don't need that feature. So the point is absolutely valid. Why do those 9.9 million people have to pay for upgrades that only one hundred thousand people use?
I can't say a bad thing about postgresql; this was really the only thing I felt the need for. For anyone who hasn't tried it you really should. Although I don't want to start a MySQL v postgresql flamewar, after trying both I think that postgres has the edge. Mysql was undisputably easier to work with and (at the time) was faster. PostgreSQL has moved on at a much faster rate though. In particular postgresql has solid support for transactions, large objects, subselects, object oriented tables. I'm convinced that if you use databases long enough you'll want every last one of these and won't be able to do without.
The professor compares the internet to the human body. I think he's incorrect in this. In the case of a human body - if you get a virus that you have no way of defeating, you die. Better would be to compare the internet with a population. A really nasy biological virus will wipe out a large portion of the population, but hopefully the diversity of the population will mean that someone will have an immunity or at least be capable of creating one, and that immunity will then spread through the population using the standard principles of natural selection. This is a good argument for keeping the diversity of computer systems connected to the internet high.
Imagine that every IP on the internet is running Windows. Now imagine a really nasty worm that exploits an, as yet unpatched, hole. The whole internet dies almost instantly. However, if the population is diverse then only a percentage is lost and the remainder can be used to rebuild those losses.
As much as I hate to say it, we're going to have to keep Windows around for operation "Human Shield".
Thank you professor Forrestor - you have been exhastive.
This is in fact leveraging a monopoly. As you rightly say - they have no monopoly on instant messaging; they do have an OS monopoly and are using it (as usual) to obtain a monopoly in instant messaging.