Are you kidding? Google collects everything on everyone. That's their whole business model, it's how they make money. I don't see why this particular example would be at all beyond the pale. I'm not saying I believe it or disbelieve it, just that it's totally plausible. But it's easy to gloss it over by calling names, isn't it?
You know what? Not that I'm opining on this particular topic, but as a general rule, I find that people who are quick to mock "conspiracy nutcases" usually do so simply because they don't want to think about stuff, so they go with the safe bet, an ad hominem attack on the messenger.
I've looked a bit at OpenSuse, but I'm really nervous about moving away from a Debian-based platform on the machines I ship. I've gotta support these things after the sale.
Have you looked at Kubuntu much? A lot of the issues you describe are not issues for me, especially the title bar/panel stuff, and Dolphin really shines when you actually run it on KDE like it's meant to be run.
But I'm always glad to hear a success story, even if nothing's ever quite perfect.
don't you think that having the motto "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters" is a wee bit of a representation that it's a "news site"?
No, I think it's an obviously ironic slogan.
The opinions that matter here at Slashdot are ours - yours and mine and even the right-wing trolls and their sock-puppets. Even the ACs. When the stories at the top of the page become saturated with astroturf press releases we've got a problem. That doesn't mean there isn't a point of view in those stories, just that they should not be the product of organized campaigns.
I agree with that, and that's a problem and it does happen from time to time around here. But this isn't an example of that. It's exactly what you said: An opinion forwarded by a contributor (Bruce Byfield posts on Slashdot fairly often, he may be in this thread somewhere). I certainly don't think this is any kind of "astroturf press release."
(What follows is actually my honest to God uncensored reaction upon reading your post. I haven't used Ubuntu myself in some time.)
WHAT?! Are you fucking serious? The option to change the goddamn window buttons back is in fucking gconf?!
HAHAHAHAHAHA!
And better yet, "Note that this ordering of the window buttons is slightly different than the typical order; in previous versions of Ubuntu and in Windows, the minimize button is to the left of the maximize button. You can change the button_layout string to reflect that ordering, but using the default Ubuntu 10.04 theme, it looks a bit strange."
Really?! People still bitch about KDE and they put up with this?! Get the fuck out of here!
Not so. I only have anecdotal evidence, but I have a lot of it.
I think it's two things. First you've got people like me. I bailed on Ubuntu several years ago for reasons mostly technical and partly political. I just didn't like the look of where things were going. But I kept selling it, for another couple years, actually, which brings me to my next point.
Then you've got people like some of my clients. (I sell Linux desktops. Yes, for money.) I have been in the business for five years (last month!), and for the first four I sold Ubuntu exclusively. And you know what? I have had complaints about the interface lately. Specifically, when they started fucking with Gnome. And I mean several, from people who no one reading this would consider "savvy Linux users." It got so nerve-wracking I now also ship Kubuntu (it frustrates me that I feel tied to Ubuntu at all in terms of my product offerings, but I do), and am looking for another friendly KDE based distro, although I haven't found one yet.
Why? Because KDE offers a more stable desktop experience than Ubuntu. (I mean stability in terms of interface predictability, not software stability.) Think about how damning that is for a minute. I mean, I love KDE, I've used it myself since I think 3.4.something, and it's really nice that the 4.x branch is now really and truly stable enough for me to ship. But until about 4.4 it wasn't what anybody would call a "stable desktop experience." The fact that it's now an all-around better and more reliable desktop option for me as a vendor than Ubuntu is speaks fucking tons.
Slashdot is not a news site. Slashdot has never been a news site. Slashdot is an opinion site, it's always been an opinion site, and has never tried to misrepresent that.
Me too, actually. My workhorse music player application (and when you've got 20k+ audio tracks, yes, workhorse is the word) is gmusicbrowser, doesn't run on Windows (well, it apparently does load, but it doesn't play music because of the lack of some perl bindings). Also, running emacs on Windows is all kinds of fucked up.
Nothing in the article (I know, I know, you didn't read it) or the summary (you did at least read the summary, didn't you?) even mention anything about any desktop environment(s) whatsoever.
Obviously you must be right, so let's get Google to change its search into a giant hierarchical mess where you need to navigate several layers of fat deep to get what you want.
That's a specious argument and I'm quite sure you know it. I am the one who organized all my files in the first place. I don't have to wade through someone else's subjective judgments to find what I need in my directory structure.
How about if you want to rate files for how good or how useful to you they are?
Why the hell would I want to do that? If I'm looking for it, it's useful to me. If I'm not, it's not. The first rule of tautology club...
Remember that tags can imitate folders anyway. Just batch apply a unique tag to a collection of files, and bam, there's your equivalent to a folder. This will often be done automatically if the required metadata was saved with the file, like MP3s do.
My file manager does that already. I don't use that feature either, because I'm the one who generated the tags in the first place.
I dare you to try that Everything program I mentioned in my initial post
I'll take your dare. Two questions: 1. Does it run on Linux? 2. Does it do anything that Nepomuk/Strigi does not do?
I will not. These people committed serious crimes. They need to be tried for them. I want Bush prosecuted like any other suspected criminal. Then I'll move on. Deal?
Time saving? Going back and applying metadata to literally hundreds of thousands of files, and keeping that regime going into the future, for time saving?
It takes 1-2 seconds for me to drill half a dozen directories down (hey, guess what else autocompletes? every decent file manager in the world!). Everything's human-readable and human-discoverable right now. I copy that directory structure somewhere else, it's still human-readable and human-discoverable right now. I need another layer of complexity on top of that like I need a burning dose of the clap.
"Right, because at no point in their life were they raised to believe that they should cover themselves."
Yeah, and you were probably raised to believe you should cover your genitals when you go to the grocery store. What are you getting at?
Is it something to the effect of "Muslim women are downtrodden and oppressed drones who can do nothing that a man does not allow?" Because that's a bunch of bullshit. There is a Muslim woman who wears the veil in my neighborhood...and is our city council representative. I don't think her man's telling her to do it.
"Do you think women would be asking to wear a burka if it wasn't for pressure from men to wear them?"
Yes. In the conversations I've had with Muslim women in my neighborhood (not to say that we're real good friends or anything, but sometimes I'll be at the coffee shop or something and get to talking with folks), the consensus that I've heard is "It's not about the men, it's about us."
A sensible directory structure never goes out of style. Human-readable, dependent on no external anything, eminently portable and transferable, and altogether future-proof. Metadata's as good as whatever the standard is. If you're pouring time into creating metadata for some gimmicky piece of proprietary garbage, you're only hurting yourself in the long run.
Without going into superfluous detail on my directory structure (lots of other people have discussed that here), I will say that the one area where I do use metadata religiously is in id3 tags for audio files. My audio files are sorted sensibly, a la/audio/artist/year - album/tracknumber - trackname, with all metadata as close to perfect as I can possibly make it. When I've got new music to add, it goes into the unsorted directory outside my audio path, where it sits until I get around to tagging and bagging it (I've been using Easytag for years, but lately I've been experimenting a bit with kid3), getting the names and directories uniform, et cetera, when it gets included in the audio structure. This is good for all kinds of reasons, especially human-readability and the ability to just copy shit over to an external drive or mp3 player (or import into an application database or whatever I want to do today) with no muss, fuss, or bother. It Just Works.
I learned this the hard way about six years ago when I first decided to organize my absolute shitty mess of audio files, which at the time was around 60GB. That process took months, but when I was finally through it it was perfect. Everything's named correctly, tagged correctly, all the cover art's there and named correctly, everything is perfect. I am determined to never have to go through that again, thus the unsorted directory regime.
"The problem with NFS and Samba solutions is that the manner in which servers and hard disks are organized has too much influence on directory structure"
Truth. When I first set up my NFS server (back in the back in the back in the day, when I was just learning Linux), I had a public share and a private share, which were (not really, but for instance)/media/public and/media/private on both the server and the clients. Now that's become superfluous to my needs, but so many external programs are pointing at/media/public and/media/private that I'm stuck with it unless I want to really go through some hell to change all those pointers.
And before some asshole says "symlinks!"...no. Not symlinks.
Slashdot Mirror
Are you kidding? Google collects everything on everyone. That's their whole business model, it's how they make money. I don't see why this particular example would be at all beyond the pale. I'm not saying I believe it or disbelieve it, just that it's totally plausible. But it's easy to gloss it over by calling names, isn't it?
You know what? Not that I'm opining on this particular topic, but as a general rule, I find that people who are quick to mock "conspiracy nutcases" usually do so simply because they don't want to think about stuff, so they go with the safe bet, an ad hominem attack on the messenger.
I've looked a bit at OpenSuse, but I'm really nervous about moving away from a Debian-based platform on the machines I ship. I've gotta support these things after the sale.
Have you looked at Kubuntu much? A lot of the issues you describe are not issues for me, especially the title bar/panel stuff, and Dolphin really shines when you actually run it on KDE like it's meant to be run.
But I'm always glad to hear a success story, even if nothing's ever quite perfect.
don't you think that having the motto "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters" is a wee bit of a representation that it's a "news site"?
No, I think it's an obviously ironic slogan.
The opinions that matter here at Slashdot are ours - yours and mine and even the right-wing trolls and their sock-puppets. Even the ACs. When the stories at the top of the page become saturated with astroturf press releases we've got a problem. That doesn't mean there isn't a point of view in those stories, just that they should not be the product of organized campaigns.
I agree with that, and that's a problem and it does happen from time to time around here. But this isn't an example of that. It's exactly what you said: An opinion forwarded by a contributor (Bruce Byfield posts on Slashdot fairly often, he may be in this thread somewhere). I certainly don't think this is any kind of "astroturf press release."
You can change the order of the window buttons on Windows through the right-click menu? News to me.
(What follows is actually my honest to God uncensored reaction upon reading your post. I haven't used Ubuntu myself in some time.)
WHAT?! Are you fucking serious? The option to change the goddamn window buttons back is in fucking gconf?!
HAHAHAHAHAHA!
And better yet, "Note that this ordering of the window buttons is slightly different than the typical order; in previous versions of Ubuntu and in Windows, the minimize button is to the left of the maximize button. You can change the button_layout string to reflect that ordering, but using the default Ubuntu 10.04 theme, it looks a bit strange."
Really?! People still bitch about KDE and they put up with this?! Get the fuck out of here!
Not so. I only have anecdotal evidence, but I have a lot of it.
I think it's two things. First you've got people like me. I bailed on Ubuntu several years ago for reasons mostly technical and partly political. I just didn't like the look of where things were going. But I kept selling it, for another couple years, actually, which brings me to my next point.
Then you've got people like some of my clients. (I sell Linux desktops. Yes, for money.) I have been in the business for five years (last month!), and for the first four I sold Ubuntu exclusively. And you know what? I have had complaints about the interface lately. Specifically, when they started fucking with Gnome. And I mean several, from people who no one reading this would consider "savvy Linux users." It got so nerve-wracking I now also ship Kubuntu (it frustrates me that I feel tied to Ubuntu at all in terms of my product offerings, but I do), and am looking for another friendly KDE based distro, although I haven't found one yet.
Why? Because KDE offers a more stable desktop experience than Ubuntu. (I mean stability in terms of interface predictability, not software stability.) Think about how damning that is for a minute. I mean, I love KDE, I've used it myself since I think 3.4.something, and it's really nice that the 4.x branch is now really and truly stable enough for me to ship. But until about 4.4 it wasn't what anybody would call a "stable desktop experience." The fact that it's now an all-around better and more reliable desktop option for me as a vendor than Ubuntu is speaks fucking tons.
Slashdot is not a news site. Slashdot has never been a news site. Slashdot is an opinion site, it's always been an opinion site, and has never tried to misrepresent that.
You're not that new here.
I don't know who this "we" is, but "they" may want to find a new forum to troll. The rest of "us" damn well know better.
Me too, actually. My workhorse music player application (and when you've got 20k+ audio tracks, yes, workhorse is the word) is gmusicbrowser, doesn't run on Windows (well, it apparently does load, but it doesn't play music because of the lack of some perl bindings). Also, running emacs on Windows is all kinds of fucked up.
Nothing in the article (I know, I know, you didn't read it) or the summary (you did at least read the summary, didn't you?) even mention anything about any desktop environment(s) whatsoever.
In short, what the fuck are you on about?
Obviously you must be right, so let's get Google to change its search into a giant hierarchical mess where you need to navigate several layers of fat deep to get what you want.
That's a specious argument and I'm quite sure you know it. I am the one who organized all my files in the first place. I don't have to wade through someone else's subjective judgments to find what I need in my directory structure.
How about if you want to rate files for how good or how useful to you they are?
Why the hell would I want to do that? If I'm looking for it, it's useful to me. If I'm not, it's not. The first rule of tautology club...
Remember that tags can imitate folders anyway. Just batch apply a unique tag to a collection of files, and bam, there's your equivalent to a folder. This will often be done automatically if the required metadata was saved with the file, like MP3s do.
My file manager does that already. I don't use that feature either, because I'm the one who generated the tags in the first place.
I dare you to try that Everything program I mentioned in my initial post
I'll take your dare. Two questions: 1. Does it run on Linux? 2. Does it do anything that Nepomuk/Strigi does not do?
I agree with that completely. We have no need to make things up; the evidence of history speaks for itself.
What serious crimes?
War crimes. Treason.
you would see that I was talking about the untrue and blatantly false accusations
I understand that, and I don't disagree. I was replying to the back half of your post. Don't get ad hominem on me.
Shit.. move on guys.
I will not. These people committed serious crimes. They need to be tried for them. I want Bush prosecuted like any other suspected criminal. Then I'll move on. Deal?
An ad-hoc mesh network does all that, and it does it for free. It requires a critical mass of nodes, but short of cutting the power, it's unkillable.
You got a better idea?
You are lazy. Lazy, stupid git.
Advertisers?
Time saving? Going back and applying metadata to literally hundreds of thousands of files, and keeping that regime going into the future, for time saving?
It takes 1-2 seconds for me to drill half a dozen directories down (hey, guess what else autocompletes? every decent file manager in the world!). Everything's human-readable and human-discoverable right now. I copy that directory structure somewhere else, it's still human-readable and human-discoverable right now. I need another layer of complexity on top of that like I need a burning dose of the clap.
"Right, because at no point in their life were they raised to believe that they should cover themselves."
Yeah, and you were probably raised to believe you should cover your genitals when you go to the grocery store. What are you getting at?
Is it something to the effect of "Muslim women are downtrodden and oppressed drones who can do nothing that a man does not allow?" Because that's a bunch of bullshit. There is a Muslim woman who wears the veil in my neighborhood...and is our city council representative. I don't think her man's telling her to do it.
"Difference being, you are free to leave that denomination and many do. It is apostasy in Islam to leave"
You are really unaware of things like Mormonism, Jehovah's Witnesses, and many parts of the evangelical Christian movement?
"Do you think women would be asking to wear a burka if it wasn't for pressure from men to wear them?"
Yes. In the conversations I've had with Muslim women in my neighborhood (not to say that we're real good friends or anything, but sometimes I'll be at the coffee shop or something and get to talking with folks), the consensus that I've heard is "It's not about the men, it's about us."
A sensible directory structure never goes out of style. Human-readable, dependent on no external anything, eminently portable and transferable, and altogether future-proof. Metadata's as good as whatever the standard is. If you're pouring time into creating metadata for some gimmicky piece of proprietary garbage, you're only hurting yourself in the long run.
Without going into superfluous detail on my directory structure (lots of other people have discussed that here), I will say that the one area where I do use metadata religiously is in id3 tags for audio files. My audio files are sorted sensibly, a la /audio/artist/year - album/tracknumber - trackname, with all metadata as close to perfect as I can possibly make it. When I've got new music to add, it goes into the unsorted directory outside my audio path, where it sits until I get around to tagging and bagging it (I've been using Easytag for years, but lately I've been experimenting a bit with kid3), getting the names and directories uniform, et cetera, when it gets included in the audio structure. This is good for all kinds of reasons, especially human-readability and the ability to just copy shit over to an external drive or mp3 player (or import into an application database or whatever I want to do today) with no muss, fuss, or bother. It Just Works.
I learned this the hard way about six years ago when I first decided to organize my absolute shitty mess of audio files, which at the time was around 60GB. That process took months, but when I was finally through it it was perfect. Everything's named correctly, tagged correctly, all the cover art's there and named correctly, everything is perfect. I am determined to never have to go through that again, thus the unsorted directory regime.
Good luck with that shit in 10-20 years. My directory hierarchies are good for life.
"The problem with NFS and Samba solutions is that the manner in which servers and hard disks are organized has too much influence on directory structure"
Truth. When I first set up my NFS server (back in the back in the back in the day, when I was just learning Linux), I had a public share and a private share, which were (not really, but for instance) /media/public and /media/private on both the server and the clients. Now that's become superfluous to my needs, but so many external programs are pointing at /media/public and /media/private that I'm stuck with it unless I want to really go through some hell to change all those pointers.
And before some asshole says "symlinks!"...no. Not symlinks.