That is because you were using a cheap-ass thermoplastic/synthetic stock instead of a quality fiberglass/synthetic stock.
There are many bolt guns with similar functionality and better performance than the Lee-Enfield.
For example, the Remington 700P weighs the same as an Enfield, but has modern accuracy (0.5 MOA out of the box isn't uncommon), durability (not as effected by temperature swings), and is available with modern cartridges like 308 Win and 300 Win Mag.
Or there are rifles like the Ruger Gunsite Scout, while not combat proven, is cold weather hunting proven, offering a very lightweight package at aroun 7 lbs, 308 Win, better accuracy than the Enfield, a temperature resistant laminate stock, and back up irons.
Not trying to be condascending here, I'm just curious. How well do fiber glass stocks do at -40 C? I notice the only rifle you listed as cold weather proven still has a wood laminate stock. Personally I'm generally pretty liberal and open to new ideas but when it comes to guns I pretty much won't touch anything that doesn't have a wooden stock. It's partly because I detest plastic and partly because experience has taught me that plastics tend to get brittle at extremely low temperatures but I've never really taken a close look at fiberglass in that context.
So what's so "tomorrow" about change from Lucida to Helvetica, which impedes legibility, requires more screen space, and makes the GUI appear fuzzy? Is that the definition of "tomorrow" now?
More to the point how does changing from Lucida to Helvetica impede legibility, require more screen space, and make the GUI appear fuzzy? I can't say that I have noticed any of these world ending problems in decades of using the Helvetica font.
The issue I have with Windows 8, and OS X.10 is the fact that they are trying to make the OS into the next tablet/mobile OS.
No, they aren't. At least, not Apple.
They are making your Mac work with your iDevice more seamlessly. There's a pretty big distinction there.
Anyone claiming this is akin to Windows 7 -> Windows 8 isn't paying attention. For one, Apple has never (and still doesn't) ship a touchscreen Mac, so it would be quite ridiculous to put a touch-centric UI on OS X. OS X is still clearly ruled by the mouse / trackpad and keyboard, and will be for the foreseeable future for one very good reason - OS X is where the content for iOS is made, and iOS is where the content made on OS X is consumed.
That is the business model for Apple, and very close to what Google is doing too if you haven't noticed. They haven't exactly been whipping people to get Android onto laptops - that's what ChromeOS is for.
I agree, having used iPads with a bluetooth keyboard and regular Windows Laptops with a touch screen as well as regular laptops I have to say I prefer the old fashioned keyboard+touchpad combination when using any laptop irrespective of whether it runs Windows, Linux or OS X because I can keep my hands on the keyboard most of the time and move the cursor with my thumb or index finger. I find that browsing, for example, goes significantly faster on OS X than it goes on iOS even with a BT keyboard because the arrow keys don't work on iOS and I have to constantly move my hand from the keyboard to do stuff like pick an item from a drop-down list or scroll down a page because the arrow keys don't work for this stuff in iOS. Touch screen devices have their uses, they are great for reading, gaming, watching movies, etc. but touch screens are no substitute for a touchpad, at least not yet.
You can already observe the effects of that one in India and China where female infanticide and selective abortion is practiced for all kinds of reasons such as the need to pay excessive dowries, inheritance traditions and religious beliefs. The problem of ending up with too many single men is usually solved by kidnapping women in other parts of the country or in neighboring countries where people are less obsessed with stupid traditions that lead them to have nothing but male offspring and force-marrying the unfortunate women to their precious sons. In some regions of India like Bengal and Assam, for example, where the gender imbalance is fairly small the kidnapping problem is so severe that girls and young women cannot go anywhere unescorted for fear of being kidnapped by bridal procurement possies from neighboring regions where they have a large surplus of sons.
One can dump on the Germans as much as one wants but both during WWI and WWII they matched and in some fields outdid the allies in technology and scientific research despite these boycotts, despite the isolation and despite the stultifying effect that the Nazi regime had on parts of the German tech sector which says something about the caliber of German science, scientists and engineers. As late as the 1950s the chief designer of North American Aviation went to night school in order to learn German so that he might study German aerodynamics research more in more detail. This resulted in the complete redesign of the aircraft that was to be come the world beating North American F-86.
If those are tech support jobs, then they might as well automate them. The best I can tell those workers they hire over there have essentially no skills in the products they are supporting. They basically just read what the computer screen tells them to say or ask. As a customer, I'd honestly rather be talking to a machine as it would give me the same answers but might actually be at little easier to understand.
Great, now all the tech support "guys" are going to sound like Professor Hawking.
Relax, you only have to start worrying when the tech support "guys" start sounding like HAL 9000.
...Did they factor in the socio-economic background of the parents, as in children of rich-folk get better education than children of poor-parents, and therefore do better, and are expected to do better, in exams.
Yes they did.
Did you bother to read the article, or did you expect someone to read it for you?
No the problem is the USA is targeted the wrong target. You can't stop ISIS with bombs. You can't stop Al queada with bombs.
You can't stop them with guns or bullets. you can't kill them all.
It is like Afgahanistan in the 1980's the CIA got the Afghan's to fight the Soviets. then the USA left which let an entire generation become jihadists. You are fighting Ideas. You are trying to prevent the Sunni- Shitte war that has been brewing for Centuries.
The USA needs to step up and develop alternative energy sources so we don't need middle east oil and let them kill each other. Once the Middle east begins to use up their oil reserves(and that is many decades away) the fighting will stop. Actually it will get far worse for a while, but it will eventually stop.
However once the USA and Europe doesn't need their oil anymore they will stop caring and let the idiots slaughter each other.(any group fighting over religion is automatically an idiot)
True enough, but what you can do is use airpower to knock out every tank, armored car, APC, artillery piece, truck and jeep that ISIS has destory their infrastrucutre and with it their economy. Then equip their enemies with heavy weapons train them in tactics likely to work against an ISIS whose arsenal has been reduced to AK-47s, SAWs, RPGs and mortars. With the way ISIS has been behaving I'm pretty sure the locals people in places like Syria, Iraq and Kurdistan can be relied upon to grab these ISIS assholes wherever they can be found the moment they get the chance to do so and kill them in way's that would make you regurgetate your dinner if you witnessed it. Pretty much everybody from Washington through the capitals of Europe, Amman, Damascus, Erbil and Baghdad to Teheran hates these assholes worse than the black plague.
Is the Admiral suffering from dementia, or is he just a fucking idiot? The attack on the Cole was successful because the rules of engagement did not allow the Cole to fire upon the boat.
So what was the crew of the Cole supposed to do? Blast every speedboat that came within 300 meters of their ship with a 20mm cannon?...and before you say yes, consider the amount of shit that would hit the fan if some foreign warship blew a speedboat out of the water in New York harbor because, and I quote: 'Well Admiral sir, it looked uuuhhh.... threatening' ? Unpopular as the notion may be with some people, you can't just sail into a harbor in a foreign country and start shooting up speedbaots that you feel _might_ be a threat. Harbors in Asia and the Middle East are crawling with all kinds of boats and collateral damage is a certainty. By the sound of it that admiral is planning to field a swarm of small autonomous boats that can be deployed by a warship to patrol around it, surround any intruder and block him, allowing the warship to escape, prevent the intdruder from escaping or just destroy him depending on the ROE in that particular location. What precisely is ididotic about that?
Aspartame is one of the few substances that has been analysed to death, and we know it is quickly metabolised into 3 parts that are also found in many other sources of food that we wouldn't think twice of consuming. We don't know nearly as much about herbal teas, for instance.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.... no matter how hard you try to make Aspartame look more innocent than bunny rabbits and fluffy kittens It still creeps me out that Donald Rumsfeld had a hand in getting it FDA approved and bringing it to market.
Please pay a visit to India or Russia or China, if you have the chance. Over there they still have a lot of people devoting their lives on innovation, because to them, it is the right thing to do
Is this because he hasn't a clue about science or because he is catering to a particular political base?
Both.
Mostly though because so many conservatives have a "we have always done it that way" attitude. Many of them don't have a clue that imperial measures are very different from US customary ones (we have 20 fluid ounces to a pint, and the US has 16). Many also don't know their pecks from their bushels, or their furlongs from their rod, poll, or perch, but think the system must be good "because its traditional".
Colloquially known as the: Nothing-should-ever-change brigade
It's a fringe brand in that Ferrari is a fringe brand. I don't think most people wouldn't want one but I don't know a soul who has one. Very few have seen them. They aren't exactly a larger brand. IF they can mass produce a model in a reasonable price range comparable to a modern model of car it will take off. Right now it is in the fringe but I don't think it will stay there. That's exactly what the guy in the article said. He didn't say Tesla was a bad idea or that it won't take off, he said it's not there yet but this next model could very well take it there.
It will be exciting to see where we go from here.
Ford was a 'fringe' brand too. Then the Ford Model-T hit the market and the Ford brand took off. Every car company, hell every company period, that manufactures something you can put a brand logo on starts off as a 'fringe' brand. Ferrari is more of a niche brand, for most of their history they have been a small volume manufacturer that caters to the super rich elite, they remained a niche brand when they created watered down versions of their super sports cars to appeal to the less illustrious segment of society that is merely extremely well off and they remained a niche brand when they tried to create cars like the Fiat 'Dino' to sell to the wealthier segment of the unwashed masses. Tesla, on the other hand has the technology and the potential to repeat some of what Ford achieved in it's first years. That is to say if the people running Tesla Motors can overcome their current fascination with the $40.000+ luxury car market and use that technology to produce a 21st century Model T that beats the crap out of the competition on price and in the miles per kolowatt department. I'm not holding my breath though. Theree are some very decent and affordable electric cars that are already being shipped by European and Asian manufacturers while Tesla claims they won't have one in the sub $40.000 range before 2017 at the earliest.
The difference between Savage Rabbits post and the FSFs statement is that the above post isn't a blanket one.
What is the FSF complaining about anyway? That Apple is hesitating to adopt their GPLv3 licensed version? Then Apple is a member of a large crowd that apparently includes Linus Torvalds who also has reservations about using GPLv3. Meanwhile Apple's version of BASH is freely downloadable and user modifiable which AFAIK is what the FSF wants. While it is certainly true that Apple should have quickly pushed a patch for this problem the FSF made a blanket statement that just isn't true.
Ahem. Apple is legally compelled to issue source code for whatever version of bash they use. It's called the GPL. For the rest of their core operating system (but not the proprietary GUI), yes, Apple voluntarily has released source code. It's mostly derived from BSD licensed stuff, and nothing compelled them to do so.
It is entirely possible to run bash on Windows, too. I'll let you figure out how. And the provider of that bash is compelled to make their source code available too.
Wooosh! The OP made the rather sweeping claim that:
Everyone using Bash has the freedom to download, inspect, and modify the code -- unlike with Microsoft, Apple, or other proprietary software.
Which covers a bit more than just BASH, he made the mistake of claiming that OS X is entirely closed source which it demonstrably is not. You can patch a bug in the VPN daemon in OS X yourself, now try doing that with the corresponding Windows component. You can do the same with a bug in the version of BASH used by OS X, fix the bug, patch the code, compile it and install it on your OS X box. Now care to try and patch a bug like this in the native Windows shell? I'll let you figure out why you can't do that unless you work for Microsoft.
It's true, Apple releases the full source code to the UNIX underlying MacOS X, including all the user land command line utilities and the OS kernel. You can rebuild them all.
So what is this article about?? Things are working exactly like FSF intended. Apple users can download the source to bash, patch it, and install it on their own machines. If people wait for the vendor to patch, what's the difference between it and closed source?
I actually patched the source code of that OS X VPN daemon with a patch I got from the bug tracking system of a Linux distribution. The whole process took an hour and by far the most of that was spent figuring out how to compile the damn thing.
Everyone using Bash has the freedom to download, inspect, and modify the code -- unlike with Microsoft, Apple, or other proprietary software.
This comes across as scaremongering, as its a blanket statement professing the openness of bash compared specifically to Microsoft and Apple, while both those companies have huge collections of open source projects where I can do just what they are trumpeting with Bash and the GPL.
Its a perfect example of why blanket statements should be studied very carefully before being used, as it can just distort your perceived stance when people call you on the flaws of your statement.
Apple open sources large portions of their OS X operating system including, it seems, the version of BASH they include with it. Using that website I was able to download the source code for their VPN daemon (same one used on Linux), patch it, compile it and install it in on my mother's MacBook to allow her to connect to a Microsoft VPN server that was sending malformed greeting strings. With Aqua you are unfortunately out of luck since it is closed source. With Windows you are not just out of luck ayoure _shit_ out of luck since the whole thing is closed source, unless you are a major foreign government. They get the rare privilege of doing their own code reviews.
Are you serious? Objective C is crap. It may have been hot stuff 25 years ago, but it's older than Java, and that shows. Swift is the future for Mac OSX/iOS development. Don't waste your time learning what was state of the art in 1988 (ie Objective C).
Objective C no worse than C, C++, Java, C#.... in fact I prefer Objective C to C++ in many ways and I definitely prefer all of these languages to Java.
Samsung phones don't get the same news coverage that Apple phones do. A new iPhone and any surrounding issues make it onto mainstream news sites and chat shows.
All large, thin phones bend. A plastic one is more likely to bend back than an aluminium one. But it depends also on the internals and how flexible or brittle they are.
Do you get overtime when Apple fucks up this badly and you have to come on Slashdot to protect them?
Get a hold of yourself. By pointing out that ultra thin mobile phones bend easily he didn't commit blasphemy, he made a simple and rather obvious engineering observation. The guy who works in the cubicle next to mine managed to destroy his Samsung Galaxy by putting it in the back pocket of his jeans and sitting down to enjoy a cup of caffé latte. There was an audible *SNAP*, the phone bent and the LCD display was ruined. The only difference here is that there was no TV news crew on the scene 30 minutes later followed by an army of fanboys venting their outrage on Slashdot over how badly Samsung had fucked up and hypothesizing that anybody pointing out that smartphones sometimes bend must be a shill on Samsung's payroll. And just for your enjoyment.... here is the link that started this flamewar, complete with a wide selection of photographs of bent smartphones: http://www.cultofmac.com/29740....
Slashdot Mirror
That is because you were using a cheap-ass thermoplastic/synthetic stock instead of a quality fiberglass/synthetic stock.
There are many bolt guns with similar functionality and better performance than the Lee-Enfield.
For example, the Remington 700P weighs the same as an Enfield, but has modern accuracy (0.5 MOA out of the box isn't uncommon), durability (not as effected by temperature swings), and is available with modern cartridges like 308 Win and 300 Win Mag.
Or there are rifles like the Ruger Gunsite Scout, while not combat proven, is cold weather hunting proven, offering a very lightweight package at aroun 7 lbs, 308 Win, better accuracy than the Enfield, a temperature resistant laminate stock, and back up irons.
Not trying to be condascending here, I'm just curious. How well do fiber glass stocks do at -40 C? I notice the only rifle you listed as cold weather proven still has a wood laminate stock. Personally I'm generally pretty liberal and open to new ideas but when it comes to guns I pretty much won't touch anything that doesn't have a wooden stock. It's partly because I detest plastic and partly because experience has taught me that plastics tend to get brittle at extremely low temperatures but I've never really taken a close look at fiberglass in that context.
So what's so "tomorrow" about change from Lucida to Helvetica, which impedes legibility, requires more screen space, and makes the GUI appear fuzzy? Is that the definition of "tomorrow" now?
More to the point how does changing from Lucida to Helvetica impede legibility, require more screen space, and make the GUI appear fuzzy? I can't say that I have noticed any of these world ending problems in decades of using the Helvetica font.
The issue I have with Windows 8, and OS X.10 is the fact that they are trying to make the OS into the next tablet/mobile OS.
No, they aren't. At least, not Apple.
They are making your Mac work with your iDevice more seamlessly. There's a pretty big distinction there.
Anyone claiming this is akin to Windows 7 -> Windows 8 isn't paying attention. For one, Apple has never (and still doesn't) ship a touchscreen Mac, so it would be quite ridiculous to put a touch-centric UI on OS X. OS X is still clearly ruled by the mouse / trackpad and keyboard, and will be for the foreseeable future for one very good reason - OS X is where the content for iOS is made, and iOS is where the content made on OS X is consumed.
That is the business model for Apple, and very close to what Google is doing too if you haven't noticed. They haven't exactly been whipping people to get Android onto laptops - that's what ChromeOS is for.
I agree, having used iPads with a bluetooth keyboard and regular Windows Laptops with a touch screen as well as regular laptops I have to say I prefer the old fashioned keyboard+touchpad combination when using any laptop irrespective of whether it runs Windows, Linux or OS X because I can keep my hands on the keyboard most of the time and move the cursor with my thumb or index finger. I find that browsing, for example, goes significantly faster on OS X than it goes on iOS even with a BT keyboard because the arrow keys don't work on iOS and I have to constantly move my hand from the keyboard to do stuff like pick an item from a drop-down list or scroll down a page because the arrow keys don't work for this stuff in iOS. Touch screen devices have their uses, they are great for reading, gaming, watching movies, etc. but touch screens are no substitute for a touchpad, at least not yet.
What about killing off girl embryos...
You can already observe the effects of that one in India and China where female infanticide and selective abortion is practiced for all kinds of reasons such as the need to pay excessive dowries, inheritance traditions and religious beliefs. The problem of ending up with too many single men is usually solved by kidnapping women in other parts of the country or in neighboring countries where people are less obsessed with stupid traditions that lead them to have nothing but male offspring and force-marrying the unfortunate women to their precious sons. In some regions of India like Bengal and Assam, for example, where the gender imbalance is fairly small the kidnapping problem is so severe that girls and young women cannot go anywhere unescorted for fear of being kidnapped by bridal procurement possies from neighboring regions where they have a large surplus of sons.
...what happens when they can detect which genes make you more likely to be a Republican.
The current gridlock in congress and the divide between conservatives and liberals will degenerate into a thermonuclear civil war?
One can dump on the Germans as much as one wants but both during WWI and WWII they matched and in some fields outdid the allies in technology and scientific research despite these boycotts, despite the isolation and despite the stultifying effect that the Nazi regime had on parts of the German tech sector which says something about the caliber of German science, scientists and engineers. As late as the 1950s the chief designer of North American Aviation went to night school in order to learn German so that he might study German aerodynamics research more in more detail. This resulted in the complete redesign of the aircraft that was to be come the world beating North American F-86.
If those are tech support jobs, then they might as well automate them. The best I can tell those workers they hire over there have essentially no skills in the products they are supporting. They basically just read what the computer screen tells them to say or ask. As a customer, I'd honestly rather be talking to a machine as it would give me the same answers but might actually be at little easier to understand.
Great, now all the tech support "guys" are going to sound like Professor Hawking.
Relax, you only have to start worrying when the tech support "guys" start sounding like HAL 9000.
Yes, hostile to tchnology like spell checkers....
Spell checkers? Dang, it's not every day one gets Nazi'd by a Hogwarts graduate...
...Did they factor in the socio-economic background of the parents, as in children of rich-folk get better education than children of poor-parents, and therefore do better, and are expected to do better, in exams.
Yes they did.
Did you bother to read the article, or did you expect someone to read it for you?
Read the article? You must be new here...
If enough people use encrypted communication, it will only be a matter of time before the use of encryption is made a crime.
Obligatory:
http://xkcd.com/504/
No the problem is the USA is targeted the wrong target. You can't stop ISIS with bombs. You can't stop Al queada with bombs.
You can't stop them with guns or bullets. you can't kill them all.
It is like Afgahanistan in the 1980's the CIA got the Afghan's to fight the Soviets. then the USA left which let an entire generation become jihadists. You are fighting Ideas. You are trying to prevent the Sunni- Shitte war that has been brewing for Centuries.
The USA needs to step up and develop alternative energy sources so we don't need middle east oil and let them kill each other. Once the Middle east begins to use up their oil reserves(and that is many decades away) the fighting will stop. Actually it will get far worse for a while, but it will eventually stop.
However once the USA and Europe doesn't need their oil anymore they will stop caring and let the idiots slaughter each other.(any group fighting over religion is automatically an idiot)
True enough, but what you can do is use airpower to knock out every tank, armored car, APC, artillery piece, truck and jeep that ISIS has destory their infrastrucutre and with it their economy. Then equip their enemies with heavy weapons train them in tactics likely to work against an ISIS whose arsenal has been reduced to AK-47s, SAWs, RPGs and mortars. With the way ISIS has been behaving I'm pretty sure the locals people in places like Syria, Iraq and Kurdistan can be relied upon to grab these ISIS assholes wherever they can be found the moment they get the chance to do so and kill them in way's that would make you regurgetate your dinner if you witnessed it. Pretty much everybody from Washington through the capitals of Europe, Amman, Damascus, Erbil and Baghdad to Teheran hates these assholes worse than the black plague.
Is the Admiral suffering from dementia, or is he just a fucking idiot? The attack on the Cole was successful because the rules of engagement did not allow the Cole to fire upon the boat.
So what was the crew of the Cole supposed to do? Blast every speedboat that came within 300 meters of their ship with a 20mm cannon? ...and before you say yes, consider the amount of shit that would hit the fan if some foreign warship blew a speedboat out of the water in New York harbor because, and I quote: 'Well Admiral sir, it looked uuuhhh.... threatening' ? Unpopular as the notion may be with some people, you can't just sail into a harbor in a foreign country and start shooting up speedbaots that you feel _might_ be a threat. Harbors in Asia and the Middle East are crawling with all kinds of boats and collateral damage is a certainty. By the sound of it that admiral is planning to field a swarm of small autonomous boats that can be deployed by a warship to patrol around it, surround any intruder and block him, allowing the warship to escape, prevent the intdruder from escaping or just destroy him depending on the ROE in that particular location. What precisely is ididotic about that?
Aspartame is one of the few substances that has been analysed to death, and we know it is quickly metabolised into 3 parts that are also found in many other sources of food that we wouldn't think twice of consuming. We don't know nearly as much about herbal teas, for instance.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.... no matter how hard you try to make Aspartame look more innocent than bunny rabbits and fluffy kittens It still creeps me out that Donald Rumsfeld had a hand in getting it FDA approved and bringing it to market.
We eat them, and if they're so smart why don't they defend themselves?!
Considering the stupid and corrupt dirtbags that we elect to rules over us, who are we to question the intelligence of cephalopods?
Please pay a visit to India or Russia or China, if you have the chance. Over there they still have a lot of people devoting their lives on innovation, because to them, it is the right thing to do
That will change...
Perhaps, but wouldn't standardizing breast sizes make life a lot less interesting? ;-)
Why standardize? Apparently you can have different size cups.
US:
Eight ounces to the cup.
Two cups to the pint.
Two pints to the quart.
Four quarts to the gallon.
Eight pints to the gallon.
Heh? I thought it was one breast to each cup?
Is this because he hasn't a clue about science or because he is catering to a particular political base?
Both.
Mostly though because so many conservatives have a "we have always done it that way" attitude. Many of them don't have a clue that imperial measures are very different from US customary ones (we have 20 fluid ounces to a pint, and the US has 16). Many also don't know their pecks from their bushels, or their furlongs from their rod, poll, or perch, but think the system must be good "because its traditional".
Colloquially known as the: Nothing-should-ever-change brigade
It's a fringe brand in that Ferrari is a fringe brand. I don't think most people wouldn't want one but I don't know a soul who has one. Very few have seen them. They aren't exactly a larger brand. IF they can mass produce a model in a reasonable price range comparable to a modern model of car it will take off. Right now it is in the fringe but I don't think it will stay there. That's exactly what the guy in the article said. He didn't say Tesla was a bad idea or that it won't take off, he said it's not there yet but this next model could very well take it there.
It will be exciting to see where we go from here.
Ford was a 'fringe' brand too. Then the Ford Model-T hit the market and the Ford brand took off. Every car company, hell every company period, that manufactures something you can put a brand logo on starts off as a 'fringe' brand. Ferrari is more of a niche brand, for most of their history they have been a small volume manufacturer that caters to the super rich elite, they remained a niche brand when they created watered down versions of their super sports cars to appeal to the less illustrious segment of society that is merely extremely well off and they remained a niche brand when they tried to create cars like the Fiat 'Dino' to sell to the wealthier segment of the unwashed masses. Tesla, on the other hand has the technology and the potential to repeat some of what Ford achieved in it's first years. That is to say if the people running Tesla Motors can overcome their current fascination with the $40.000+ luxury car market and use that technology to produce a 21st century Model T that beats the crap out of the competition on price and in the miles per kolowatt department. I'm not holding my breath though. Theree are some very decent and affordable electric cars that are already being shipped by European and Asian manufacturers while Tesla claims they won't have one in the sub $40.000 range before 2017 at the earliest.
The difference between Savage Rabbits post and the FSFs statement is that the above post isn't a blanket one.
What is the FSF complaining about anyway? That Apple is hesitating to adopt their GPLv3 licensed version? Then Apple is a member of a large crowd that apparently includes Linus Torvalds who also has reservations about using GPLv3. Meanwhile Apple's version of BASH is freely downloadable and user modifiable which AFAIK is what the FSF wants. While it is certainly true that Apple should have quickly pushed a patch for this problem the FSF made a blanket statement that just isn't true.
Ahem. Apple is legally compelled to issue source code for whatever version of bash they use. It's called the GPL. For the rest of their core operating system (but not the proprietary GUI), yes, Apple voluntarily has released source code. It's mostly derived from BSD licensed stuff, and nothing compelled them to do so.
It is entirely possible to run bash on Windows, too. I'll let you figure out how. And the provider of that bash is compelled to make their source code available too.
Wooosh! The OP made the rather sweeping claim that:
Everyone using Bash has the freedom to download, inspect, and modify the code -- unlike with Microsoft, Apple, or other proprietary software.
Which covers a bit more than just BASH, he made the mistake of claiming that OS X is entirely closed source which it demonstrably is not. You can patch a bug in the VPN daemon in OS X yourself, now try doing that with the corresponding Windows component. You can do the same with a bug in the version of BASH used by OS X, fix the bug, patch the code, compile it and install it on your OS X box. Now care to try and patch a bug like this in the native Windows shell? I'll let you figure out why you can't do that unless you work for Microsoft.
It's true, Apple releases the full source code to the UNIX underlying MacOS X, including all the user land command line utilities and the OS kernel. You can rebuild them all.
So what is this article about?? Things are working exactly like FSF intended. Apple users can download the source to bash, patch it, and install it on their own machines. If people wait for the vendor to patch, what's the difference between it and closed source?
I actually patched the source code of that OS X VPN daemon with a patch I got from the bug tracking system of a Linux distribution. The whole process took an hour and by far the most of that was spent figuring out how to compile the damn thing.
This comes across as scaremongering, as its a blanket statement professing the openness of bash compared specifically to Microsoft and Apple, while both those companies have huge collections of open source projects where I can do just what they are trumpeting with Bash and the GPL.
Its a perfect example of why blanket statements should be studied very carefully before being used, as it can just distort your perceived stance when people call you on the flaws of your statement.
Apple open sources large portions of their OS X operating system including, it seems, the version of BASH they include with it. Using that website I was able to download the source code for their VPN daemon (same one used on Linux), patch it, compile it and install it in on my mother's MacBook to allow her to connect to a Microsoft VPN server that was sending malformed greeting strings. With Aqua you are unfortunately out of luck since it is closed source. With Windows you are not just out of luck ayoure _shit_ out of luck since the whole thing is closed source, unless you are a major foreign government. They get the rare privilege of doing their own code reviews.
Are you serious? Objective C is crap. It may have been hot stuff 25 years ago, but it's older than Java, and that shows. Swift is the future for Mac OSX/iOS development. Don't waste your time learning what was state of the art in 1988 (ie Objective C).
Objective C no worse than C, C++, Java, C# .... in fact I prefer Objective C to C++ in many ways and I definitely prefer all of these languages to Java.
Samsung phones don't get the same news coverage that Apple phones do. A new iPhone and any surrounding issues make it onto mainstream news sites and chat shows.
All large, thin phones bend. A plastic one is more likely to bend back than an aluminium one. But it depends also on the internals and how flexible or brittle they are.
Do you get overtime when Apple fucks up this badly and you have to come on Slashdot to protect them?
Get a hold of yourself. By pointing out that ultra thin mobile phones bend easily he didn't commit blasphemy, he made a simple and rather obvious engineering observation. The guy who works in the cubicle next to mine managed to destroy his Samsung Galaxy by putting it in the back pocket of his jeans and sitting down to enjoy a cup of caffé latte. There was an audible *SNAP*, the phone bent and the LCD display was ruined. The only difference here is that there was no TV news crew on the scene 30 minutes later followed by an army of fanboys venting their outrage on Slashdot over how badly Samsung had fucked up and hypothesizing that anybody pointing out that smartphones sometimes bend must be a shill on Samsung's payroll. And just for your enjoyment.... here is the link that started this flamewar, complete with a wide selection of photographs of bent smartphones: http://www.cultofmac.com/29740....