I don't understand what the Fifth has to do with GNU or free speech or free beer.
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
I vastly prefer gmusicbrowser, it has pretty much all Amarok's features in a gtk based application. I also find it to be more stable, but am willing to chalk that up to the fact that I use Kubuntu, and seem to get KDE bugs that people who use other distros don't.
I don't think that's exactly it. Has it at all occurred to you that the problem might lie more in the fact that the message is fucking crazy?
he pointed out that the price of a barrel of oil in gold is the same as it was in 1992.
We're all smart people here. We know that numbers can mean pretty much anything. These particular numbers, at this particular time, mean that the price of oil has risen, and the price of gold has risen. Gee, imagine that.
Ron's ideas of cutting spending, ending the war, following the Constitution and removing the income tax seem to be at least talking points that should be doing better than what Ron seems to be getting in the polls.
I know, right? I mean, I called CBS myself and told them that if I was elected president, I would end all war, feed the hungry with genetically modified chickens the size of dinosaurs, and every American would commute to work in their very own helicopter. I can't understand why they haven't called back to get me into the debates yet.
because I want to believe.
Yeah, I can tell. The Truth Is Out There, buddy. Way the fuck out there.
This election is probably one of the most important elections in our nation's history.
Nonsense. Hillary Clinton would keep our troops in Iraq, keep the Patriot Act, and continue the inexorable march toward corporate law in America. Rudy 9/11, ditto, but more of it. John McCain, ditto. Ron Paul will not get elected because he is fucking insane. Barack Obama will not get elected because his name is Obama. Mike Huckabee will not get elected because God just can't possibly hate us that much.
So what exactly makes this "one of the most important elections in our nation's history?"
You doing something with your own money is noble. You forcing a nation to do the same thing by collecting taxes under the presumption of pain of imprisonment is somewhat a bad thing. Not always but outside of Fire, Safe drinking water and effective security, you know, basic governmental infrastructure, it is generally not good.
So, ensuring that the next generation of kids that comes up might actually have a stabbing chance at bringing their country out of the third world and into the twenty-first (hell, the twentieth) century isn't one of those things that it might be good to collect tax revenue for? I'd say it goes hand in hand with "effective security," you know, ensuring that there will still be a country there in ten years.
What you're talking about is someone letting their religious views dictate how they run the country, which is a very bad quality, but is separate from their religious views.
No, it is not. Religion (or even its lack, in the case of for instance secular humanism) by its very nature is the absolute center of people's lives, moralities, and social beliefs. There's no such thing as keeping one's religious views separate. My religion (Nordic Paganism) infuses every single thing I do throughout my day. Every interaction I have. Every social stance I take. Sometimes it's not exactly a direct correlation, but if you trace pretty much any idea back far enough, it ends up at "God said so." That's not just George Bush, that's not just me, that's everybody. Atheists, Christians, Muslims, Wiccans. Everybody.
Ron Paul being a creationist is completely irrelevant to his ability to be a good president. Religious views have no bearing on one's ability to run the country.
You can still believe that after the last eight years?
Why not Amarok? Not a rhetorical question, seriously curious. I have several issues with it, but for the criteria you named (browsing, selection, and playback) I feel that it beats the pants off iTunes.
My main gripe with iTunes is that it forces you to organize your music the way it wants you to. Fuck that. I've had the same directory structure and naming and tagging system for ten years. To quote Top Gun, "The rules are not flexible, nor am I."
(If you'd rather have a GTK app, please for the love of God try gmusicbrowser. I like it more than Amarok, but I use KDE so I use Amarok. You'll thank me for this.)
Oh, horseshit. ALL of my friends (except the ones who are barred from using it at their jobs) use Firefox, and they are not tech people. Yes, they know me, and I am tech people, and many of them heard of it through me, but if you're saying "no one uses Firefox except people who know someone who uses it," well, surely that may be true, but it is most certainly a meaningless statement.
Proprietary: Civilization 4, by a mile. I've been a Civ player since 2, and 4 (especially with the Beyond the Sword expansion) is hands-down the most innovative of the series to date. I was extremely worried when 2K took the title over, but they've done just a phenomenal job with it (as opposed to, say, Pirates, which they absolutely ruined). Civ 4 is why I keep a Windows partition.
Free: Nethack, still. Just like last year, and the year before. Next year too.
Why would anyone expect that a more complicated and considerably more secure operating system would be faster! It's pretty foolish to equate speed with better. It will require a better computer to run it at the same speed as an older simpler OS.
Shit, somebody better call the Debian guys and tell them to stop! Silly-ass troll.
Really? Linux is better? Considering that you have to throw out all investment in the software you have which runs on Windows? You need to forget everything you learned about Windows, and re-learn for Linux? That's a better idea?
By your 'logic' the War in 1776 was also a Civil War.
Of course it was. Civil War, according to dictionary.com: A war between factions or regions of the same country. At the time, we were part of a country called Great Britain. Perhaps you've heard of them, they drink lots of tea, have better grammar than we do, and put out some quality sitcoms from time to time (see Red Dwarf).
If the south had won the War Between the States, would you also be insisting that that wasn't a "civil war?"
I sympathize. I lost my grandmother to cancer two years back. But if you can put the emotional response in check for just a minute here, I don't think lack of money in this area is the problem at all. The root of the problem is that this money is pretty much a giveaway to pharmaceutical companies who make billions-with-a-B every year treating cancer (or AIDS, or another topic that I know a little about, multiple sclerosis). Needless to say, these folks don't exactly have a vested interest in curing these diseases.
Contrast that method of research with something like the March of Dimes, founded in 1938 as a charitable organization dedicated to fighting polio, which in the first half of the twentieth century ran rampant everywhere. Tens of thousands of people were diagnosed every year. The March of Dimes got its start by asking everyone in the nation to contribute one shiny dime to the fight against polio, and in less than 20 years, they had the vaccine. Fifty years later, polio has been utterly wiped out in nearly every first world country.
Moral: Capitalism in medical research funding simply does not work. There are better ways and we already know what they are.
Not only redundant, but totally missing the point. One of the bonuses to having a Facebook account (which I do) is that I can vet what other people post about me, be it pictures or the blow-by-blow of last weekend's party or whatever. You cannot do that. You don't even know if there's stuff on Facebook about you. Tell me again how there are "no privacy implications for you."
I agree with almost everything you said there, but you lost me with "communicating with relatives and dear friends, often in cases where communication is essential, such as family emergencies." Who the fuck uses Myspace to communicate about family emergencies? I get phone calls.
Terribly sorry I didn't reply to you for a whole day. This is stupid. It all ended up with some rant about Red Hat, for god's sake, when the word "Linux" hadn't even been used in the entire debate by either of us. And then you called me a zealot. If you can't stay on point, I don't fucking care.
In my opinion, it doesn't really matter whether ubuntu is better, because Microsoft already has >90% of the market... When a company has that much marketshare and actively tries to keep others from entering the playing field, it's not really going to happen.
America Online. Standard Oil. AT&T. You keep poking them with millions of small sticks until the fuckers die.
Slashdot Mirror
I second that emotion. If I wanted Nautilus, I'd fucking use Gnome.
I don't get it, please explain... ??
I vastly prefer gmusicbrowser, it has pretty much all Amarok's features in a gtk based application. I also find it to be more stable, but am willing to chalk that up to the fact that I use Kubuntu, and seem to get KDE bugs that people who use other distros don't.
Like most /.ers
O RLY?
But the message is not getting our there.
I don't think that's exactly it. Has it at all occurred to you that the problem might lie more in the fact that the message is fucking crazy?
he pointed out that the price of a barrel of oil in gold is the same as it was in 1992.
We're all smart people here. We know that numbers can mean pretty much anything. These particular numbers, at this particular time, mean that the price of oil has risen, and the price of gold has risen. Gee, imagine that.
Ron's ideas of cutting spending, ending the war, following the Constitution and removing the income tax seem to be at least talking points that should be doing better than what Ron seems to be getting in the polls.
I know, right? I mean, I called CBS myself and told them that if I was elected president, I would end all war, feed the hungry with genetically modified chickens the size of dinosaurs, and every American would commute to work in their very own helicopter. I can't understand why they haven't called back to get me into the debates yet.
because I want to believe.
Yeah, I can tell. The Truth Is Out There, buddy. Way the fuck out there.
This election is probably one of the most important elections in our nation's history.
Nonsense. Hillary Clinton would keep our troops in Iraq, keep the Patriot Act, and continue the inexorable march toward corporate law in America. Rudy 9/11, ditto, but more of it. John McCain, ditto. Ron Paul will not get elected because he is fucking insane. Barack Obama will not get elected because his name is Obama. Mike Huckabee will not get elected because God just can't possibly hate us that much.
So what exactly makes this "one of the most important elections in our nation's history?"
-p.
You doing something with your own money is noble. You forcing a nation to do the same thing by collecting taxes under the presumption of pain of imprisonment is somewhat a bad thing. Not always but outside of Fire, Safe drinking water and effective security, you know, basic governmental infrastructure, it is generally not good.
So, ensuring that the next generation of kids that comes up might actually have a stabbing chance at bringing their country out of the third world and into the twenty-first (hell, the twentieth) century isn't one of those things that it might be good to collect tax revenue for? I'd say it goes hand in hand with "effective security," you know, ensuring that there will still be a country there in ten years.
What you're talking about is someone letting their religious views dictate how they run the country, which is a very bad quality, but is separate from their religious views.
No, it is not. Religion (or even its lack, in the case of for instance secular humanism) by its very nature is the absolute center of people's lives, moralities, and social beliefs. There's no such thing as keeping one's religious views separate. My religion (Nordic Paganism) infuses every single thing I do throughout my day. Every interaction I have. Every social stance I take. Sometimes it's not exactly a direct correlation, but if you trace pretty much any idea back far enough, it ends up at "God said so." That's not just George Bush, that's not just me, that's everybody. Atheists, Christians, Muslims, Wiccans. Everybody.
Ron Paul being a creationist is completely irrelevant to his ability to be a good president. Religious views have no bearing on one's ability to run the country.
You can still believe that after the last eight years?
Why not Amarok? Not a rhetorical question, seriously curious. I have several issues with it, but for the criteria you named (browsing, selection, and playback) I feel that it beats the pants off iTunes.
My main gripe with iTunes is that it forces you to organize your music the way it wants you to. Fuck that. I've had the same directory structure and naming and tagging system for ten years. To quote Top Gun, "The rules are not flexible, nor am I."
(If you'd rather have a GTK app, please for the love of God try gmusicbrowser. I like it more than Amarok, but I use KDE so I use Amarok. You'll thank me for this.)
Oh, horseshit. ALL of my friends (except the ones who are barred from using it at their jobs) use Firefox, and they are not tech people. Yes, they know me, and I am tech people, and many of them heard of it through me, but if you're saying "no one uses Firefox except people who know someone who uses it," well, surely that may be true, but it is most certainly a meaningless statement.
Proprietary: Civilization 4, by a mile. I've been a Civ player since 2, and 4 (especially with the Beyond the Sword expansion) is hands-down the most innovative of the series to date. I was extremely worried when 2K took the title over, but they've done just a phenomenal job with it (as opposed to, say, Pirates, which they absolutely ruined). Civ 4 is why I keep a Windows partition.
Free: Nethack, still. Just like last year, and the year before. Next year too.
Why would anyone expect that a more complicated and considerably more secure operating system would be faster! It's pretty foolish to equate speed with better. It will require a better computer to run it at the same speed as an older simpler OS.
Shit, somebody better call the Debian guys and tell them to stop! Silly-ass troll.
Really? Linux is better? Considering that you have to throw out all investment in the software you have which runs on Windows? You need to forget everything you learned about Windows, and re-learn for Linux? That's a better idea?
Yes. Really.
[Life is] about doing deals to gently move the status quo over to your side.
The hell it is.
incorrectness is by far the worst of the two.
:)
In that spirit, I feel compelled to mention that the proper phrasing there is "worse of the two."
By your 'logic' the War in 1776 was also a Civil War.
Of course it was. Civil War, according to dictionary.com: A war between factions or regions of the same country. At the time, we were part of a country called Great Britain. Perhaps you've heard of them, they drink lots of tea, have better grammar than we do, and put out some quality sitcoms from time to time (see Red Dwarf).
If the south had won the War Between the States, would you also be insisting that that wasn't a "civil war?"
So you won't use software with CD keys? Man, good luck with that.
It's as easy as $sudo apt-get a_clue. Try it, you'll love it!
So if I buy 85% of advertising from your newspaper, that means I have an editorial say in what you publish? Bogus.
Of course you do. You obviously do not work in the press.
I sympathize. I lost my grandmother to cancer two years back. But if you can put the emotional response in check for just a minute here, I don't think lack of money in this area is the problem at all. The root of the problem is that this money is pretty much a giveaway to pharmaceutical companies who make billions-with-a-B every year treating cancer (or AIDS, or another topic that I know a little about, multiple sclerosis). Needless to say, these folks don't exactly have a vested interest in curing these diseases.
Contrast that method of research with something like the March of Dimes, founded in 1938 as a charitable organization dedicated to fighting polio, which in the first half of the twentieth century ran rampant everywhere. Tens of thousands of people were diagnosed every year. The March of Dimes got its start by asking everyone in the nation to contribute one shiny dime to the fight against polio, and in less than 20 years, they had the vaccine. Fifty years later, polio has been utterly wiped out in nearly every first world country.
Moral: Capitalism in medical research funding simply does not work. There are better ways and we already know what they are.
Other people might post shit about you on Facebook!
(The lameness filter stopped me, so just imagine that's in caps.)
They can call you a troll if they want, but you're right.
Not only redundant, but totally missing the point. One of the bonuses to having a Facebook account (which I do) is that I can vet what other people post about me, be it pictures or the blow-by-blow of last weekend's party or whatever. You cannot do that. You don't even know if there's stuff on Facebook about you. Tell me again how there are "no privacy implications for you."
I agree with almost everything you said there, but you lost me with "communicating with relatives and dear friends, often in cases where communication is essential, such as family emergencies." Who the fuck uses Myspace to communicate about family emergencies? I get phone calls.
Terribly sorry I didn't reply to you for a whole day. This is stupid. It all ended up with some rant about Red Hat, for god's sake, when the word "Linux" hadn't even been used in the entire debate by either of us. And then you called me a zealot. If you can't stay on point, I don't fucking care.
In my opinion, it doesn't really matter whether ubuntu is better, because Microsoft already has >90% of the market... When a company has that much marketshare and actively tries to keep others from entering the playing field, it's not really going to happen.
America Online. Standard Oil. AT&T. You keep poking them with millions of small sticks until the fuckers die.