I'm reminded of the old adage 'with great power, comes great responsibility'. [...] Unix assumes, if you're root, you know what you're doing, and it will do precisely what you ask, no matter how hideously stupid it may be.
I'm also reminded of an "old adage": When you assume, you make an ass out u and me.
You are correct, of course, but that only reinforces what I've said: Preventing a clueless user from unintentially nuking their system, even as root, isn't "making the OS newbie friendly"; it's just a damn smart thing to do. Especially when these tools could be easily modified to accept a --no-warning flag or a global variable from the more advanced users.
Robustness isn't just about allowing the user to do whatever they want to. We always talk about something like, say, filesystem corruption prevention as making a more "robust" system, but then just assume that a user will know what not to do. That's a dead end.
Seriously, Linux in those days WAS amazingly robust, for the most part. I bet, once you got it installed, it was reliable as a tank.
Here's a general suggestion to all "Linux snobs": Stop claiming Linux is robust if the user, even a newbie, can fuck it up with zero thought or warning. It seems that when you talk about the robustness of Linux, you're also assuming a certain level of knowledge (of Linux, hardware, and the general interaction of components in your system) on the part of the user. Don't do that; it's stupid.
. ..to find an answer to why that happened, people have to be willing to look further back into the past than just G.W. Bush, something I'm not sure they're prepared to do. It's too easy and too satisfying to use something like this as political hay, rather than as the wake-up call it ought to be of how systemically out-of-control the government is, and has been for some time.
People aren't willing to take notice, because they want to believe that a new administration will right the wrongs; that a simple change will put everything back to the way it was.
Basically, the majority is lazy and unwilling to work hard. Not much of a surprise, but we've brought it upon ourselves...
Unless I'm missing something here, this action on Microsoft's part is reminiscent of their "response" to Netscape when Microsoft finally recognized they had fallen way behind in an important market.
And, unless I'm missing something again, I think Microsoft still qualifies as a legally defined "monopoly", and this looks like leveraging their monopoly to unfairly skew market forces and competition.
And, unless I'm mistaken, this should be illegal.
Looks like someone slept through Microsoft Hating 101...
IE wasn't a big deal because Microsoft gave it away for free. It was a big deal because they bundled it with Windows.
I mean with no explanation some of us were forming complex theories involving girls raised to be hackers by their evil masters, barbie, who have trained to seek out and destroy geek culture starting with slashdot.
Are you kidding? This all started with the upgrade to a CSS-based layout. I've always wondered what made them do it. Now it's clear there must of been some promise of sex involved. "They" have been planning this all along...
Even if people are only buying them to put windows on the effect on the market will be the same as if they were going to become hard-core open source supporters. It still gives a bigger market share to this stuff, and with bigger market shares bigger companies want to get in on the action... then it snowballs
But it's false marketshare. I'm a little disheartened with this attitude that, "As long as it looks like more people are using Linux, it's all good."
It usually doesn't run as well on Windows as on Linux, but, sure.
I can't say I've compared a vast majority of the software available for both Linux and Windows, but I can say with certainty that Firefox, Thunderbird, and OpenOffice are all a lot more responsive on Windows than on the Linux distros I've tried them on (Ubunutu and Gentoo).
So popularity == quality? That is *often* not the case.
No, but the chances are a lot higher. Let's face it: companies are going to develop for a platform that will net them the greatest returns for their investment. Ideals are great, but they don't pay the bills...
Same here. There will be Aero Glass, Aero Basic, and Windows Classic. From what I've read, in Windows Classic mode, Vista will have the same graphical requirements as Windows 2000...
. ..last time I checked, Vista had fairly crazy minimum requirements. ..
It's been pointed out that those minimum requirements are for running the Aero Glass interface. It you don't want it, you can get away with lower specs.
My point is that no DRM will ever work to stop a pirate. At a fundamental level DRM cannot stop piracy from a product that is meant to actually be used by a consumer. That holds for all existing form of DRM (as we have seen) and all future forms of DRM (as we shall see). So my comment matched perfectly the expanse of the original.
Wtf? That's exactly what the original quote is saying. It makes no distinction between past, present, or future implementations of DRM. All of it will do little to stop piracy. By "little" they're likely referring to the "casual 'pirates'".
I don't see how you can take esception to the wording of the original, then turn around and say the exact same things, just differently.
I envision a web browser which is the browser equivalent of Linux; a collection of simple programs performing very specific and narrowly defined tasks, all working through clean APIs or protocols. The HTML rendering being split off entirely, the javascript in its own library, image rendering separate, cookie management, security features, history management, bookmarks display, etc. Ideally, the various parts would be so simple that the barriers to development would be lowered drastically resulting in the organic rise of alternatives in the various segments; imagine having a flamewar over which js rendering plugin/library were better!
Ahh, yes... because everyone will love choosing which of the 100 Firefox distros will be right for them...
I agree with her that students should be spending their time thinking about what she's saying, but writing notes on paper doesn't facilitate that any more than laptops do.
I agree. I can't argue with the final decision, but her stated reasons are terrible.
"My main concern was they were focusing on trying to transcribe every word that was I saying, rather than thinking and analyzing," Entman said Monday.
So, instead she wants them to take notes using a method that requires more time and effort to "transcribe every word", because, let's face it... if you're going to insist that the student actually write down the stuff you say, they're going to make sure they write down everything.
It sucks missing a question on a final, because you too busy "thinking and analyzing" a previous statement to write down the relevent info.
"The computers interfere with making eye contact. You've got this picket fence between you and the students."
I suppose that depends on the room. For stadium-like lecture halls, I can almost understand, but for anything else this doesn't make sense. Looking at a laptop's screen actually places the student's angle of vision closer toward the professor, compared to staring almost straight down at a piece of paper.
She would have been much better off with the statement, "I feel that they interfere with the learning process," and just left it at that...
I take exception to the woring this phrase, for the use of "little to stop pirates" implies that there might actually exist some for of DRM that would in fact ever stop piracy, especially the real pirates and not just mislabled fourty-year old women.
Actually, the phrase is clearly referring to "DRM technologies" in general. If it had said "current DRM technologies" you might have a legitimate concern about the wording.
It's not supported in PHP4. Sure, there are the extensions, but they're NOT installed by default in common server configs, so you'd have to do it by hand, and that's SLOOOOOOWWW.
Oh, yeah... Good point. I've been using PHP5 long enough to have driven that from my mind.
According to the ZDNet write-up, he does business as the Snodgrass Publishing Group, who have some interesting offerings at a site they own called "cybersheet.com".
LordHunter317: I'm then going to write a through paper on every flaw on Automatix, both real and thereotical, along with outlines of how to fix them, and provide it to the public. It'll be submitted both at these forums, to popular news sites like/., and to security-related mailing lists (for security issues) like full-disclosure. At that point, we can see if I'm just "moron" or not.
Bleh. What's wrong with XML and XSL? Seriously... The developer generates the XML document structure, then passes it through the XSLT processor, applying an XSL stylesheet created by the web designer. Standards all the way...
I actually prefer GNOME over KDE. I hope the people pointing and laughing at XP's default theme aren't KDE users, because... ugh...
But that just a visual thing, which most people would no doubt try to pass off as insignificant. Still, if I need to stare at something all day, it better look good to me.
The last I heard, copy and paste was still rather peg-legged. I think GNOME had some progress in this area, and I'm not sure about KDE, but I haven't paid much attention to that for quite a few months.
Another thing is, obviously, applications. GAIM is nice, but compared to Trillian, it's a downgrade (here's to hoping that comically status oversized button in GAIM 2.0 doesn't annoy me too much).
The two distros I've mainly tried (Ubuntu and Gentoo) have, somehow, seriously fucked up their distributions of Firefox. Version 1.0.7 in Ubuntu "Breezy Badger" was disgustingly slow. In Gentoo, Firefox 1.5 took an annoyingly noticable amount of time to paint even simple dialog boxes. Firefox on XP doesn't have this problem.
The available audio players for GNOME at least, just kind of blow. I mean, I see XMMS still being pushed as "the best", BMP barely seemed to be developed before they ditched it for the "next generation", which looks like it might be fairly decent. Still, I have no doubts I'd find Winamp 5 far superior.
Eclipse... yeesh. I know it's supposed to be good, and it might be a fine Java IDE, but my multiple attempts at trying to get it to do PHP ended in failure, and on the one success... deep disappointment. My experience with Zend Studio on Windows has spoiled me, apparently.
Games, too, like it or not. No, I'm talking about native games. None of this fiddling with WINE or Cedega. Video drivers (at least the proprietary ATI) are much more of a hassle to get working in Gentoo and even Ubuntu than is honestly necessary.
Basically, the vast majority of things I need or want to do can be done better and far easier on Windows. I feel many of the applications I use on Windows have no Linux alternative of equal quality. You can say I should just stick with Windows then, but I'm all out of souls to sell. (User management sucks, too.)
I'm seduced by the possibilities in using Linux--I know they exist--but the cost of entry if much, much more than just learning how to use a new OS.
I'll do a dance for customization and tweaking, but I won't do a dance before I get to that point, and that's my experience.
I see plenty of people get all rabid about any suggestion that Linux needs to be "like Windows", and I'll agree that it doesn't, but in their rampage, they essentially toss the baby out with the bath water.
Also, I do realize that the vast majority of developers aren't getting paid to do what they do--I think it's awesome that they dedicate the time and find the motivation to do this--but sometimes I wonder if they get just a little bit too high on themselves.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that desktop Linux is ready... for Linux users, but that's about it.
Slashdot Mirror
You are correct, of course, but that only reinforces what I've said: Preventing a clueless user from unintentially nuking their system, even as root, isn't "making the OS newbie friendly"; it's just a damn smart thing to do. Especially when these tools could be easily modified to accept a --no-warning flag or a global variable from the more advanced users.
Robustness isn't just about allowing the user to do whatever they want to. We always talk about something like, say, filesystem corruption prevention as making a more "robust" system, but then just assume that a user will know what not to do. That's a dead end.
Basically, the majority is lazy and unwilling to work hard. Not much of a surprise, but we've brought it upon ourselves...
IE wasn't a big deal because Microsoft gave it away for free. It was a big deal because they bundled it with Windows.
Then again, I suppose perception is reality...
SCO could be the one to fall from the rafters and break their neck.
No, but the chances are a lot higher. Let's face it: companies are going to develop for a platform that will net them the greatest returns for their investment. Ideals are great, but they don't pay the bills...
I don't see how you can take esception to the wording of the original, then turn around and say the exact same things, just differently.
So, instead she wants them to take notes using a method that requires more time and effort to "transcribe every word", because, let's face it... if you're going to insist that the student actually write down the stuff you say, they're going to make sure they write down everything.
It sucks missing a question on a final, because you too busy "thinking and analyzing" a previous statement to write down the relevent info.
I suppose that depends on the room. For stadium-like lecture halls, I can almost understand, but for anything else this doesn't make sense. Looking at a laptop's screen actually places the student's angle of vision closer toward the professor, compared to staring almost straight down at a piece of paper.
She would have been much better off with the statement, "I feel that they interfere with the learning process," and just left it at that...
1) Sue Google.
2) ???
3) Get laid!
By your logic, by installing Free Software on Windows I'm putting the Freedom(TM) into Windows. That's just dribble.
Windows is still Windows, and Linux is still Linux...
Did he ever follow through with this?
Bleh. What's wrong with XML and XSL? Seriously... The developer generates the XML document structure, then passes it through the XSLT processor, applying an XSL stylesheet created by the web designer. Standards all the way...
I actually prefer GNOME over KDE. I hope the people pointing and laughing at XP's default theme aren't KDE users, because... ugh...
But that just a visual thing, which most people would no doubt try to pass off as insignificant. Still, if I need to stare at something all day, it better look good to me.
The last I heard, copy and paste was still rather peg-legged. I think GNOME had some progress in this area, and I'm not sure about KDE, but I haven't paid much attention to that for quite a few months.
Another thing is, obviously, applications. GAIM is nice, but compared to Trillian, it's a downgrade (here's to hoping that comically status oversized button in GAIM 2.0 doesn't annoy me too much).
The two distros I've mainly tried (Ubuntu and Gentoo) have, somehow, seriously fucked up their distributions of Firefox. Version 1.0.7 in Ubuntu "Breezy Badger" was disgustingly slow. In Gentoo, Firefox 1.5 took an annoyingly noticable amount of time to paint even simple dialog boxes. Firefox on XP doesn't have this problem.
The available audio players for GNOME at least, just kind of blow. I mean, I see XMMS still being pushed as "the best", BMP barely seemed to be developed before they ditched it for the "next generation", which looks like it might be fairly decent. Still, I have no doubts I'd find Winamp 5 far superior.
Eclipse... yeesh. I know it's supposed to be good, and it might be a fine Java IDE, but my multiple attempts at trying to get it to do PHP ended in failure, and on the one success... deep disappointment. My experience with Zend Studio on Windows has spoiled me, apparently.
Games, too, like it or not. No, I'm talking about native games. None of this fiddling with WINE or Cedega. Video drivers (at least the proprietary ATI) are much more of a hassle to get working in Gentoo and even Ubuntu than is honestly necessary.
Basically, the vast majority of things I need or want to do can be done better and far easier on Windows. I feel many of the applications I use on Windows have no Linux alternative of equal quality. You can say I should just stick with Windows then, but I'm all out of souls to sell. (User management sucks, too.)
I'm seduced by the possibilities in using Linux--I know they exist--but the cost of entry if much, much more than just learning how to use a new OS.
I'll do a dance for customization and tweaking, but I won't do a dance before I get to that point, and that's my experience.
I see plenty of people get all rabid about any suggestion that Linux needs to be "like Windows", and I'll agree that it doesn't, but in their rampage, they essentially toss the baby out with the bath water.
Also, I do realize that the vast majority of developers aren't getting paid to do what they do--I think it's awesome that they dedicate the time and find the motivation to do this--but sometimes I wonder if they get just a little bit too high on themselves.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that desktop Linux is ready... for Linux users, but that's about it.
Well, fuck, man... Sorry I murdered your family. Wow.