"I think Katz is too cynically dismissive of the positive changes that have occurred as a result of the internet."
He's into pure sensationalism. If you look closely, that's about all you will find in his articles. He obviously must associate attention with that (poor) element in his journalism. Wake up Katz, sensationalistic reporting and the Internet don't quite mix unless you're talking stocks, Napster or back in 1996 during its mass introduction as "the information superhighway."
Mabye he should try reporting on something positive the Internet has done instead of spewing up all this crap about a backlash. Or mabye even an article on something TECHNICAL rather then all this psuedo-political-social-awareness bullshit. Todays Steaming Pile of Shit (tm) from Katz was absurd.
(Infinite space) I always shared that viewpoint, until I was forced out of it by what seems to be the current belief in science:
Steven Hawkins, a renowned scientist who has written several books on black holes, space, and the like states in "Brief History of Time" space is not infinite. It's a hard to follow book because such a vast amount of concepts are explained (I haven't finished it, yet.) Basically, I'll explain this as layman as possible: The Universe, while not infinite, continues to expand, but it will oneday cease to expand and begin to collapse unto itself when gravity becomes strong enough. An interesting book, but quite trying to read front to back if you haven't taken a lot of science/physics classes/chemistry. As I said before, I always believed space was infinite; I still find it a difficult theory to grasp . . .
Re:What they won't show, perhaps ever...
on
15 Minutes
·
· Score: 1
"Perhaps it is the lack of a reminder that we all can die, will die, and may die at the hands of another individual, that drives the lack of respect and responsibility in American society?"
And how do you purpose this "reminder" to come about? People find thinking about their own death unpleasant.
I personally think it's sad our country isn't more fascist in regards to the way it treats certain individuals. I think rapists should receive the death penalty or atleast more time then they do. I'm not a conservative, though, thus I don't think we should imprison drug users or dealers. Anyhow, back to the main point of this message: I also think live death penalties are actually quite a good idea... so long as a good sized (say, 80%) portion of the money generated by advertising for the show goes to the government. What a win win situation. Right after a brief discussion of the criminals activites, images of the weeping victim's families, etc, people can then feel the satisfaction of watching another worthless human being die, all the while the government getting more money to make up for all of it lost in the keeping of prisoners. I think, too, people crave seeing justice done; why does it have to be called blood lust? What we really do need are more death penalties, lest America wants to find its citizens asking themselves that age-old question why we keep around the lowest form of life at our cost. To which the answer is, of course, the torture element. Yes, we haven't even progressed past medieval ages. Thus, you have the most amazing contradiction in that Ultra-liberals think we're committing some great wrong "lowering ourselves" to the criminals level but torturing a human for up to 50-70 years is acceptable. You can say this whole idea reeks of Christian "eye-for-an-eye" mentality but I disgress; it's PROGRESS.
Yet our government is too feeble-minded and ultra-liberals running too rampant for us to get anywhere in that kind of a deal. Shit!
I think the notion of the mainstream embracing web-based software is a major misconception. Why?
1) Quality of application execution. First, you have to consider bandwidth. Second, you have to consider CPU cycles, as most of the web delivered software uses interpreted languages.
2) Consumer issues. Would a customer like the idea of not owning something? Or a possible loss of privacy (depending on the delivery method... I will agknowledge I haven't read that much about it, mainly because I don't believe it's the future of computing)?
3) More focused on corporate use to begin with. It's obvious the majority of web-based applications will be created for/by and used in companies for certain niche tasks. That's where it's target is.
MS and SUN can push this all they want but their level of success and penetration into the market depends on the technologies appropriateness for a given segment. As I stated above, I really think this stuff is more toward corporate environments then actual consumers. Also, let's not forget that a company can fail if an offerring isn't well suited enough; i.e. the network computer. I think that all this promise of web delivered apps is decorated with the slogan people were calling a sham: The Network Is The Computer.
(In any event, more power to the open source programmers who want to implement it in ways that Microsoft never can -- developed for every platform.)
When I was younger I bought a scientology book (out of ignorance) and read some of it... It was completely based on inane principles... Like illnesses are connected to the mind (the whole pyschosomatic argument... pure bullshit, and I'm tired of hearing doctors stand behind it, too,) wierd theories about sexuality (accompanied with the belief that all forms of deviation from hetrosexual behavior is classifiable as perversion...) And the back cover promises to change your life. Sure, change your life. Just read 500 pages of absolute horse shit and all your woes magically dissolve per your newfound "scientific spiritual" knowledge... Christ, I hate L Ron Hubbard. The only way to fix your life is to do it. That's easier READ then done.
You know, I read somewhere John Travolta was a scientologist, as where many other celebrities.
Anyway, the whole thing is such an obvious contradiction in terms, too (atleast with the majority of religions in mind)... Science and religion? A science of religion? A religion of science? Anyway you want to put it, give me a break.
Hmm. I guess it makes for a (proven!) scary combination.
Comparing widely viewed persecution (which, BTW, I wasn't even aware occurred during the course of the whole Columbine media frenzy... Unless you want to count the endless drivel from an obscure Katz as "media") to a, comparitively speaking, small group bearing an uncomplimentary summary of religion's mechanics (this, mind you, isn't persecution, as religious bodies are impossible to attack, aside from firearm use) doesn't seem to match quite well.
The name of God in the past has crushed people by the thousands (i.e. the crusades.) Today it still does in lesser extents -- prohibiting same-sex marriages, discouraging abortion, etc, is nothing more then Christianity, once again, speaking its pompous ideaology. More along the lines of mainstream cause and effect, Christianity generally gives people a convienient way to fallback on God after they've wronged others. Let's not forget the number of Christians who are as right as rain -- they claim to pray for those outsiders who haven't yet found their "salvation" but inside their puny minds this conjuring of divine prayer/thought is really "They're wrong! I'm right! They're wrong!" Giving the masses some credit, though, extremists are usually the unintelligent, the feeble, and the rednecks. However, the fact that such an attitude can be created by religion not only unflatteringly displays its inner-workings which are the same for every participant, it also exposes its biggest flaw: Need for human evangelism (evangelism not only spreading the word, acting OUT on the word.)
Christianity and other religions have evolved from the dark ages? Hardly. It's the same pray-for-HIS-right (and he is dynamic), pearly gates reward iced atop a life of misery, sexual and sexuality repression, etc. Sure, there are some churches out there that are open minded. Some would even argue Christianity has so many different faces and some contain so little ignorance -- fine, but they still rely on the bible. If I found a church that came together under a pagan deity and believed in a lot of principles I agreed with, had an "open sermon" format (anyone could speak,) all this under the name of spirituality, I'd happilly subscribe to the addition of spirituality in my life. But this doesn't exist because it's not the standard; the masses dictate what is and they currently (as have for hundreds of years) subscribe to, granted, a variety of different twisted systems all relying mainly on abasement and blind faith to stay afloat (including a lot of the Eastern religions -- buddhism, notably, is in the same mindset as Christianity -- pay your cards right or come back as a disabled black lesbian IV drug user.)
It does not take an extremely jaded person to point out the flaws in large religions, nor does it make them a troll. More and more people nowadays are realizing that religion doesn't quite fit the bill. If anything is deserving of attack -- religion having attacked so many, why not it taste it's own "eye-for-an-eye" medicine -- it is religion. People who think those who make "generalizations" about religion are ignorant should realize they are made because they're suprisingly easy to make with a correctness that simply cannot be denied.
I really can't understand the whole gripe people have with them being used in restaurants, and I'm really very anti-cell phone.
A restaurant is full of noise, conversations, etc. You are pointing your finger at someone for conducting a conversation via different medium and saying that's not OK in a place where conversations aren't even moderated or "listened to" to begin with. That seems very against principles most intelligent people claim subscription to.
I pity myself and others who have to deal with hells of public transit, albeit meanwhile someone complains about fucking cell phone use in a public restaurant.
Bah. That whole thing struck me as rambling from your stereotypical, amphetamine addicted, overly self-proud per his expression of excessive cynicism and extremist opinion embracement college student; one of those people who takes an opinion and with abstract ideas complimented with usage of exceptionally large vocabulary in effort to give impression of intelligence still fails to make any real point other then what a fucking strange soapbox they must be standing on.
You think it's "impressive Oracle is promoting Linux." Put two and two together. Linux is free. That means more systems can run for less cost, and more money can be given toward Oracle. So, instead of a bunch of NT or Solaris machines.... Yeah, real impresive.
"IBM promoting Linux, however, not impressive." Linux is free. AIX, a UNIX targetted at the enterprise, belongs to IBM and costs money. AIX generates money. IBM could be plugging their e-commerce solution (whatever the fuck that actually is, pray tell) as "Linux compatible," but, no, they're going straight for an ad campaign promoting only an operating system, nothing but the FREE operating system that doesn't directly generate them any revenue; all this during turbulent times in the tech sector?
It's impressive, exciting, but one thing it is NOT is altogether suprising. The line is drawn there: IBM's distant and not so distant public advertisment campaigns targetted at the 1% population who make the decision calls in large companies show IBM's public marketing is so, so abstract and seemingly a piss of money away. Atleast they're pissing it away in right, good hearted fashion; for that, they deserve some praise.
Picture this. Dark room. Cigarettes. Later era KMFDM. A Plan-9 laptop. They have the code for the satelittes!!! Now, they are one path sort of setting up us the fucking bomb! This is like every hacker movie amplified by a notch... Mabye they can crush the fucking White House? I'd push carriage return with my cock..... oh Christ, shiver....
It's also notable Microsoft doesn't publish it's Internet Explorer 5.x for x86 Solaris (while you can find it for Sparc Solaris and HP-UX.) While this has been mentioned with the fact that they could port it to Linux using that code base, the fact it isn't being provided for x86 Solaris is a bigger issue with high level programming being identical with Sparc Solaris. I wrote them an email about this, asking if and when it would be available, and they never responded.
What's their excuse? Or, better yet, cut right to their clear motivation and recognize this company for it's most harmful movement of all: Keep control of the x86 market via every possible means.
It was astounding in that WP7, it's precursor, was actually BETTER then WP8. Why? I don't care how many nifty new features (read: trivial) WP8 had -- it had far more bugs, bombed out often, contrasting sharply with my use of the rockhard WP7. It goes to show Corel really doesn't put a lot into their Linux products. The WP for WINE (that's what it should be called) suite is pure example of this. As far as the toolkit used in a Linux native app, I'm all for whatever gets the job done -- motif doesn't look half as bad as people say it is, though the lack of it maintaining a theme/consistent look with other apps is troublesome (although there's a great programming opportunity to someone who wants.Xdefaults to be in accordance with whatever theme is in use.)
On that note, I ask, does anyone know where I can find WP7 for download? It seems to have dropped off the face of the earth. Yes, I know a license is required.
I think their defense is porting to Linux naitvely would require too many resources. And, that is true to some extent, as Windows programs really are different. The WP Office code is probably very attached to Win32 APIs.
What I should have stated (sorry, too early haze) is the conversion utility would have to be an open source, free software product, a seperate download. So the client does convert the file to.ogg, but with the help of the freely available program. Ogg is native to the client itself.
Biggest hurdle: The Napster situation. I don't see it changing anytime soon to allow the.OGG extension. But, Napster might not be around to change anytime soon;)
Well, it wasn't really the fault of the open source mozilla organization. The code Netscape left them to, the 5.x branch, was completely different then 4.x, and was vastly incomplete and shit from the get-go. You can rant and rave about how they had plenty of time to "fix it", but mabye it was so radical and the purposed development goals/architecture so set in stone it got in the way of the end product coming in a timely fashion. Mozilla tries to be many different things -- even a programming tool, to a certain extent. And that's kind of my take on it. Mabye they should have started work with the 4.x branch and gone from there. I partially agree with you; Mozilla stands behind its strengths ("open source", "standards compliant") while the users won't stand behind it because it's such a pain in the ass to use. I'm tired of hearing about code optimization that won't come for another year or so -- I want it now.
As far as the 4.x branch, I'm sure people would disagree with it being a starting point for a new Netscape, stating entirely new frame work was needed, but it certainly feels more proven.
Using slightly different compression methods, how does OGG performance compare to MP3? Systems being as fast as they are, nowadays, this isn't that *big* of an issue, but it is nonetheless with older systems in mind and those with heavy load.
For those who say OGG is late, consider the factors in it not being so pushed for. There was never a huge consumer demand for an MP3 alternative. People own gigs and gigs of MP3s... telling them to convert because of a patent that will affect them when they purchase a commercial product by a few dollars doesn't mean much to them, as they commonly use only XMMS/Winamp and Napster/Gnapster. Companies looking to market commercial digital music players and/or software, on the other hand, plagued with the prospect of paying the MP3 patent owner money for each product they sell, must be more interested. But, again, it is very dependent on the consumer since they would have to convert the MP3 to OGG without help from any software supplied by the commercial company supplying the product -- but software supplied from a non-commercial entity, such as Ogg Vorbis creators, could be downloaded.... Packaged, though? I don't think it could be packaged with the product, regardless of it being "free" or not, because it would be included as part of a commercial product. The best a company could do would be an automatic download (of course with yes/no prompt and license agreement) of the extension from Vorbis to their uploading software.
Boy, you sure seem to have set your record with this one -- in inane, assinine, senseless ideas. "Money is an imaginary and intellectual concept, and the internet is an imaginary real." Imaginary real? Isn't that a contradiction in terms? "We are moving into a post-capitalsociety, where the only thing of worth is the posession of knowledge and the spread of ideas." Give me a break. What do you think is inspiring the development of new ideas? Knowledge may be free, but, more importantly, the implementation of ideas is usually not.
"I predict, with reasonable certainty, that money will not exist in 25 years, and capital will be pure ideas." So what happens to the rest of America who is working for these "pure ideas"? How are these ideas compensated? It sounds a bit reminiscent of Communism, when you consider a system that does not compensate workers with capital/money.
You, lady, are a windbag. Even (yes, possible!) moreso irritating, you never reply to any valid arguments in response to your idiotic rantings.
I personally theorize this person is an artificial intelligence program gone horribly awry. And I think it's irresponsible to see her posts moderated up (especially ones like this) when they contain such logic that is so broken down and unsupported. Just because someone can state an idea eloquently doesn't mean it's worthy of moderation points, especially if all they're communicating is a bunch of bullshit.
What the fuck do you expect? This isn't Windows, or BeOS. UNIX is very, very different then Windows.
The GUI a completely seperate entity then the operating system (aside from assistance such as DRI kernel drivers) is one thing... X11 itself is another, especially it being so "policy free": Where no one toolkit can be agreed upon... With all these different standards also creating a need for additional libraries (== additional code)... And when developers and vendors alike can't seem to agree... What's to be done? Furthermore, it does reignite the argument, such is KDE's slogan... Is UNIX ready for the desktop? Take into consideration UNIX wasn't made with the idea of a GUI being 100% integrated like that of, say, Windows or OS/2. That doesn't make it any less of an operating system, but it's something to consider before you complain.
A year and a half ago the memory consumption was an issue. It's certainly not anymore. If you want to run KDE instead of Windows you have to pay the price. That price may or may not include a RAM upgrade, but it unavoidably includes accepting the fact KDE will be slower then Windows because of the nature of the situation I have described above.
I used to run a system with 64MB using Windowmaker capable of all those tasks. I was even using GNOME for awhile on the same system and didn't encounter many memory related problems, except Netscape would occasionally memory-leak (which plagues my current 128 mb system all the same.)
If you can get by with your current setup, fine. I certainly wasn't saying and/or implying it's essential to run something like KDE or GNOME. Also, I agree there are not many useful apps specific to KDE or GNOME, Konquerer being the obvious exception. I do think, though, that people should try to be realistic. No one working with KDE code *can* make much of a change in the memory requirements. It's just the nature of KDE. There is a lot of overhead.
128MB is pretty standard, anyway, and with memory prices what they are I don't think my suggestion was in anyway outrageous even with regards to the most conservative of spender.
You state your performance with KDE is poor on a 466 Mhz Celeron w/ 64 MB ram.
I recommend you upgrade to 128 MB RAM, which is really the standard nowadays and is essential with the nature of UNIX desktop environments -- they require a lot of libraries to be loaded...
A) The replies from this person are always the same: mechanical and kiss ass toward the subject. It's like someone who blindly agrees with everything from an idol. Atleast that's the way they appear to me, and I'm sure I'm not the only one who feels this way. Someone pointed out on a serious note that it's like she's someone in disguised posting for karma, then to go on a trolling spree; while this is probably not the case, you have to agree her replies are ALWAYS the same, always in agreement with the general purposed consensus we're supposed to all have here on the given article/topic.
B) While it tries to make a valid point, she is denouncing in the post a vast majority of Linux advocates as no-nothings in terms of programming... that certainly isn't positive or fair, and it's based on what, pray tell? Her fucking Slashdot reading? Furthermore, is a strong programming background required to atleast be knowledgable regarding the strengths, programming or non-programming, of a particular OS/environment?
In conclusion, I agree with modding her down to troll, and think they should continue to do so.
"He will pay the price when he has to come face to face with his creator."
Lovely. I think the first message in this thread and the above quote quite possibly qualifies you as the biggest windbag on Slashdot.
If you think you're doing advocacy a favour by denouncing Microsoft's creator as an abomination and making inane claims like ".NET will be for Linux, along with Office2000, on the Microsoft Linux distro" (neverminding the GPL's protection of user from a proprietary Linux system; no one can make a Linux distribution with special core C libraries [Libc],) then think again. "Advocacy" of that nature just shows the utterly assinine "wOrld domination!!!!" attitude maintained by some in the Linux camp.
Let's be realistic about THE operating system we use, the company we dislike and religion/GOD in general. I live with far less money then the average populus makes on average... the "eternal reward" for my obedience and observance of laws, both human nature related and legal, right doesn't fucking brighten my day, nor does "the eternal punishment" for those who have wronged me.
Oh, yeah, the famous DOS matrix login. I guess that came from WWiV. Ewww:)
Yeah, we were hearing even about a supposed
Renegade backdoor "from a guy who knows for a fact"... basically no one gave a shit.... the Vision/X and Oblivion/2 rumours came about mainly because of the stiff registration fee.... guy said FOAFF whole HD got nuked because he was running a keygen-reg'd Vision/X board.
PCB had a major following by the elites. It was considered really hard if you ran it. There were file bases on this one guys board just full of every single possible PCB "mod" you could imagine. That's probably the best of the whole mod thing... I always thought mods for Renegade were stupid. It had a powerful programming language... so that kind of sets it apart. Stock PCB is horrid. I wasn't blessed enough to see a highly modded PCB....got a copy once and it's, like others were saying, the most complicated BBS to set up.
Funny you should remember RoboBBS! I called a RoboBBS board once during the OLD days... this was like, back in 1993-1994. Boy, did it suck. Part of the fun of BBSing was the ANSI, anyhow. Some of that artwork made people look like God.
Can you point us to some of this misinformation? I'm wondering why I haven't seen it mentioned here... If propaganda against Linux hits the fan, the shit hits it *here*, accordingly. It's as consistent as an equation.
SUN has released Staroffice's source code, given their JAVA interpreter away, etc. SGI is working on a journaling file system that will make Linux all the more enterprise ready, and they promote the MIPS port of Linux (mind you, as much as possible.) With all these kind actions toward Linux, I find it hard to believe either company would try to discredit Linux.
"I'm sad to see VA go." ?? Where has it been said they're leaving? A 25 percent staff cut == Company end? Or are you just concluding that's the case due to it's stock price? Furthermore, if VA is leaving, it is indeed their fault; They work on the embodiment of a very unique product that stands far apart from other UNIX implementations... If they fail with their endeavour, it's a failure on them.
You could easily search for FILE_ID.DIZ lines with excess ASCII symbols (including a repeating amount of low alphabetic ASCII characters) and have them removed -- this wasn't hard and when I was into it I wrote a QB program to do just that -- and all the stupid pissing of territory from file bases, magically removed replaced with concise descriptions. Granted, the file system wasn't the best, but it was very easy in most areas to make Renegade act right. You could even stuff keystrokes into the buffer with a certain menu function, thus eliminating the "List [*.*]?" and likewise redundant questions.
An issue during the times was the so-called "backdoor." That was another reason most people supported Renegade; a lot of people presumed Oblivion/2 contained a back door, it being "elite" software.
Oh, and you forgot PCBoard, the ultimate in ELiTE;)
On a lighter note, one of the largest WAREZ boards in my area ran using LoraBBS, a Remote Access clone. I guess functionality was there.
Slashdot Mirror
"I think Katz is too cynically dismissive of the positive changes that have occurred as a result of the internet."
He's into pure sensationalism. If you look closely, that's about all you will find in his articles. He obviously must associate attention with that (poor) element in his journalism. Wake up Katz, sensationalistic reporting and the Internet don't quite mix unless you're talking stocks, Napster or back in 1996 during its mass introduction as "the information superhighway."
Mabye he should try reporting on something positive the Internet has done instead of spewing up all this crap about a backlash. Or mabye even an article on something TECHNICAL rather then all this psuedo-political-social-awareness bullshit. Todays Steaming Pile of Shit (tm) from Katz was absurd.
(Infinite space) I always shared that viewpoint, until I was forced out of it by what seems to be the current belief in science:
Steven Hawkins, a renowned scientist who has written several books on black holes, space, and the like states in "Brief History of Time" space is not infinite. It's a hard to follow book because such a vast amount of concepts are explained (I haven't finished it, yet.) Basically, I'll explain this as layman as possible: The Universe, while not infinite, continues to expand, but it will oneday cease to expand and begin to collapse unto itself when gravity becomes strong enough. An interesting book, but quite trying to read front to back if you haven't taken a lot of science/physics classes/chemistry. As I said before, I always believed space was infinite; I still find it a difficult theory to grasp . . .
"Perhaps it is the lack of a reminder that we all can die, will die, and may die at the hands of another individual, that drives the lack of respect and responsibility in American society?"
And how do you purpose this "reminder" to come about? People find thinking about their own death unpleasant.
I personally think it's sad our country isn't more fascist in regards to the way it treats certain individuals. I think rapists should receive the death penalty or atleast more time then they do. I'm not a conservative, though, thus I don't think we should imprison drug users or dealers. Anyhow, back to the main point of this message: I also think live death penalties are actually quite a good idea... so long as a good sized (say, 80%) portion of the money generated by advertising for the show goes to the government. What a win win situation. Right after a brief discussion of the criminals activites, images of the weeping victim's families, etc, people can then feel the satisfaction of watching another worthless human being die, all the while the government getting more money to make up for all of it lost in the keeping of prisoners. I think, too, people crave seeing justice done; why does it have to be called blood lust? What we really do need are more death penalties, lest America wants to find its citizens asking themselves that age-old question why we keep around the lowest form of life at our cost. To which the answer is, of course, the torture element. Yes, we haven't even progressed past medieval ages. Thus, you have the most amazing contradiction in that Ultra-liberals think we're committing some great wrong "lowering ourselves" to the criminals level but torturing a human for up to 50-70 years is acceptable. You can say this whole idea reeks of Christian "eye-for-an-eye" mentality but I disgress; it's PROGRESS.
Yet our government is too feeble-minded and ultra-liberals running too rampant for us to get anywhere in that kind of a deal. Shit!
I feel inclined to comment.
I think the notion of the mainstream embracing web-based software is a major misconception. Why?
1) Quality of application execution. First, you have to consider bandwidth. Second, you have to consider CPU cycles, as most of the web delivered software uses interpreted languages.
2) Consumer issues. Would a customer like the idea of not owning something? Or a possible loss of privacy (depending on the delivery method... I will agknowledge I haven't read that much about it, mainly because I don't believe it's the future of computing)?
3) More focused on corporate use to begin with. It's obvious the majority of web-based applications will be created for/by and used in companies for certain niche tasks. That's where it's target is.
MS and SUN can push this all they want but their level of success and penetration into the market depends on the technologies appropriateness for a given segment. As I stated above, I really think this stuff is more toward corporate environments then actual consumers. Also, let's not forget that a company can fail if an offerring isn't well suited enough; i.e. the network computer. I think that all this promise of web delivered apps is decorated with the slogan people were calling a sham: The Network Is The Computer.
(In any event, more power to the open source programmers who want to implement it in ways that Microsoft never can -- developed for every platform.)
Wow. What a bunch of nutty people.
When I was younger I bought a scientology book (out of ignorance) and read some of it... It was completely based on inane principles... Like illnesses are connected to the mind (the whole pyschosomatic argument... pure bullshit, and I'm tired of hearing doctors stand behind it, too,) wierd theories about sexuality (accompanied with the belief that all forms of deviation from hetrosexual behavior is classifiable as perversion...) And the back cover promises to change your life. Sure, change your life. Just read 500 pages of absolute horse shit and all your woes magically dissolve per your newfound "scientific spiritual" knowledge... Christ, I hate L Ron Hubbard. The only way to fix your life is to do it. That's easier READ then done.
You know, I read somewhere John Travolta was a scientologist, as where many other celebrities.
Anyway, the whole thing is such an obvious contradiction in terms, too (atleast with the majority of religions in mind)... Science and religion? A science of religion? A religion of science? Anyway you want to put it, give me a break.
Hmm. I guess it makes for a (proven!) scary combination.
Comparing widely viewed persecution (which, BTW, I wasn't even aware occurred during the course of the whole Columbine media frenzy... Unless you want to count the endless drivel from an obscure Katz as "media") to a, comparitively speaking, small group bearing an uncomplimentary summary of religion's mechanics (this, mind you, isn't persecution, as religious bodies are impossible to attack, aside from firearm use) doesn't seem to match quite well.
The name of God in the past has crushed people by the thousands (i.e. the crusades.) Today it still does in lesser extents -- prohibiting same-sex marriages, discouraging abortion, etc, is nothing more then Christianity, once again, speaking its pompous ideaology. More along the lines of mainstream cause and effect, Christianity generally gives people a convienient way to fallback on God after they've wronged others. Let's not forget the number of Christians who are as right as rain -- they claim to pray for those outsiders who haven't yet found their "salvation" but inside their puny minds this conjuring of divine prayer/thought is really "They're wrong! I'm right! They're wrong!" Giving the masses some credit, though, extremists are usually the unintelligent, the feeble, and the rednecks. However, the fact that such an attitude can be created by religion not only unflatteringly displays its inner-workings which are the same for every participant, it also exposes its biggest flaw: Need for human evangelism (evangelism not only spreading the word, acting OUT on the word.)
Christianity and other religions have evolved from the dark ages? Hardly. It's the same pray-for-HIS-right (and he is dynamic), pearly gates reward iced atop a life of misery, sexual and sexuality repression, etc. Sure, there are some churches out there that are open minded. Some would even argue Christianity has so many different faces and some contain so little ignorance -- fine, but they still rely on the bible. If I found a church that came together under a pagan deity and believed in a lot of principles I agreed with, had an "open sermon" format (anyone could speak,) all this under the name of spirituality, I'd happilly subscribe to the addition of spirituality in my life. But this doesn't exist because it's not the standard; the masses dictate what is and they currently (as have for hundreds of years) subscribe to, granted, a variety of different twisted systems all relying mainly on abasement and blind faith to stay afloat (including a lot of the Eastern religions -- buddhism, notably, is in the same mindset as Christianity -- pay your cards right or come back as a disabled black lesbian IV drug user.)
It does not take an extremely jaded person to point out the flaws in large religions, nor does it make them a troll. More and more people nowadays are realizing that religion doesn't quite fit the bill. If anything is deserving of attack -- religion having attacked so many, why not it taste it's own "eye-for-an-eye" medicine -- it is religion. People who think those who make "generalizations" about religion are ignorant should realize they are made because they're suprisingly easy to make with a correctness that simply cannot be denied.
I really can't understand the whole gripe people have with them being used in restaurants, and I'm really very anti-cell phone.
A restaurant is full of noise, conversations, etc. You are pointing your finger at someone for conducting a conversation via different medium and saying that's not OK in a place where conversations aren't even moderated or "listened to" to begin with. That seems very against principles most intelligent people claim subscription to.
I pity myself and others who have to deal with hells of public transit, albeit meanwhile someone complains about fucking cell phone use in a public restaurant.
Bah. That whole thing struck me as rambling from your stereotypical, amphetamine addicted, overly self-proud per his expression of excessive cynicism and extremist opinion embracement college student; one of those people who takes an opinion and with abstract ideas complimented with usage of exceptionally large vocabulary in effort to give impression of intelligence still fails to make any real point other then what a fucking strange soapbox they must be standing on.
Hmmm... Let me get this straight.
You think it's "impressive Oracle is promoting Linux." Put two and two together. Linux is free. That means more systems can run for less cost, and more money can be given toward Oracle. So, instead of a bunch of NT or Solaris machines.... Yeah, real impresive.
"IBM promoting Linux, however, not impressive." Linux is free. AIX, a UNIX targetted at the enterprise, belongs to IBM and costs money. AIX generates money. IBM could be plugging their e-commerce solution (whatever the fuck that actually is, pray tell) as "Linux compatible," but, no, they're going straight for an ad campaign promoting only an operating system, nothing but the FREE operating system that doesn't directly generate them any revenue; all this during turbulent times in the tech sector?
It's impressive, exciting, but one thing it is NOT is altogether suprising. The line is drawn there: IBM's distant and not so distant public advertisment campaigns targetted at the 1% population who make the decision calls in large companies show IBM's public marketing is so, so abstract and seemingly a piss of money away. Atleast they're pissing it away in right, good hearted fashion; for that, they deserve some praise.
A would be hacker cock errects instantly.
..... oh Christ, shiver....
Picture this. Dark room. Cigarettes. Later era KMFDM. A Plan-9 laptop. They have the code for the satelittes!!! Now, they are one path sort of setting up us the fucking bomb! This is like every hacker movie amplified by a notch... Mabye they can crush the fucking White House? I'd push carriage return with my cock
It's also notable Microsoft doesn't publish it's Internet Explorer 5.x for x86 Solaris (while you can find it for Sparc Solaris and HP-UX.) While this has been mentioned with the fact that they could port it to Linux using that code base, the fact it isn't being provided for x86 Solaris is a bigger issue with high level programming being identical with Sparc Solaris. I wrote them an email about this, asking if and when it would be available, and they never responded.
What's their excuse? Or, better yet, cut right to their clear motivation and recognize this company for it's most harmful movement of all: Keep control of the x86 market via every possible means.
I used to use WP8 Commercial (personal) a lot.
.Xdefaults to be in accordance with whatever theme is in use.)
It was astounding in that WP7, it's precursor, was actually BETTER then WP8. Why? I don't care how many nifty new features (read: trivial) WP8 had -- it had far more bugs, bombed out often, contrasting sharply with my use of the rockhard WP7. It goes to show Corel really doesn't put a lot into their Linux products. The WP for WINE (that's what it should be called) suite is pure example of this. As far as the toolkit used in a Linux native app, I'm all for whatever gets the job done -- motif doesn't look half as bad as people say it is, though the lack of it maintaining a theme/consistent look with other apps is troublesome (although there's a great programming opportunity to someone who wants
On that note, I ask, does anyone know where I can find WP7 for download? It seems to have dropped off the face of the earth. Yes, I know a license is required.
I think their defense is porting to Linux naitvely would require too many resources. And, that is true to some extent, as Windows programs really are different. The WP Office code is probably very attached to Win32 APIs.
That's what I was writing about.
.ogg, but with the help of the freely available program. Ogg is native to the client itself.
.OGG extension. But, Napster might not be around to change anytime soon ;)
What I should have stated (sorry, too early haze) is the conversion utility would have to be an open source, free software product, a seperate download. So the client does convert the file to
Biggest hurdle: The Napster situation. I don't see it changing anytime soon to allow the
Well, it wasn't really the fault of the open source mozilla organization. The code Netscape left them to, the 5.x branch, was completely different then 4.x, and was vastly incomplete and shit from the get-go. You can rant and rave about how they had plenty of time to "fix it", but mabye it was so radical and the purposed development goals/architecture so set in stone it got in the way of the end product coming in a timely fashion. Mozilla tries to be many different things -- even a programming tool, to a certain extent. And that's kind of my take on it. Mabye they should have started work with the 4.x branch and gone from there. I partially agree with you; Mozilla stands behind its strengths ("open source", "standards compliant") while the users won't stand behind it because it's such a pain in the ass to use. I'm tired of hearing about code optimization that won't come for another year or so -- I want it now.
As far as the 4.x branch, I'm sure people would disagree with it being a starting point for a new Netscape, stating entirely new frame work was needed, but it certainly feels more proven.
Using slightly different compression methods, how does OGG performance compare to MP3? Systems being as fast as they are, nowadays, this isn't that *big* of an issue, but it is nonetheless with older systems in mind and those with heavy load.
For those who say OGG is late, consider the factors in it not being so pushed for. There was never a huge consumer demand for an MP3 alternative. People own gigs and gigs of MP3s... telling them to convert because of a patent that will affect them when they purchase a commercial product by a few dollars doesn't mean much to them, as they commonly use only XMMS/Winamp and Napster/Gnapster. Companies looking to market commercial digital music players and/or software, on the other hand, plagued with the prospect of paying the MP3 patent owner money for each product they sell, must be more interested. But, again, it is very dependent on the consumer since they would have to convert the MP3 to OGG without help from any software supplied by the commercial company supplying the product -- but software supplied from a non-commercial entity, such as Ogg Vorbis creators, could be downloaded.... Packaged, though? I don't think it could be packaged with the product, regardless of it being "free" or not, because it would be included as part of a commercial product. The best a company could do would be an automatic download (of course with yes/no prompt and license agreement) of the extension from Vorbis to their uploading software.
Boy, you sure seem to have set your record with this one -- in inane, assinine, senseless ideas. "Money is an imaginary and intellectual concept, and the internet is an imaginary real." Imaginary real? Isn't that a contradiction in terms? "We are moving into a post-capitalsociety, where the only thing of worth is the posession of knowledge and the spread of ideas." Give me a break. What do you think is inspiring the development of new ideas? Knowledge may be free, but, more importantly, the implementation of ideas is usually not.
"I predict, with reasonable certainty, that money will not exist in 25 years, and capital will be pure ideas." So what happens to the rest of America who is working for these "pure ideas"? How are these ideas compensated? It sounds a bit reminiscent of Communism, when you consider a system that does not compensate workers with capital/money.
You, lady, are a windbag. Even (yes, possible!) moreso irritating, you never reply to any valid arguments in response to your idiotic rantings.
I personally theorize this person is an artificial intelligence program gone horribly awry. And I think it's irresponsible to see her posts moderated up (especially ones like this) when they contain such logic that is so broken down and unsupported. Just because someone can state an idea eloquently doesn't mean it's worthy of moderation points, especially if all they're communicating is a bunch of bullshit.
What the fuck do you expect? This isn't Windows, or BeOS. UNIX is very, very different then Windows.
... X11 itself is another, especially it being so "policy free": Where no one toolkit can be agreed upon... With all these different standards also creating a need for additional libraries (== additional code)... And when developers and vendors alike can't seem to agree... What's to be done? Furthermore, it does reignite the argument, such is KDE's slogan... Is UNIX ready for the desktop? Take into consideration UNIX wasn't made with the idea of a GUI being 100% integrated like that of, say, Windows or OS/2. That doesn't make it any less of an operating system, but it's something to consider before you complain.
The GUI a completely seperate entity then the operating system (aside from assistance such as DRI kernel drivers) is one thing
A year and a half ago the memory consumption was an issue. It's certainly not anymore. If you want to run KDE instead of Windows you have to pay the price. That price may or may not include a RAM upgrade, but it unavoidably includes accepting the fact KDE will be slower then Windows because of the nature of the situation I have described above.
I used to run a system with 64MB using Windowmaker capable of all those tasks. I was even using GNOME for awhile on the same system and didn't encounter many memory related problems, except Netscape would occasionally memory-leak (which plagues my current 128 mb system all the same.)
If you can get by with your current setup, fine. I certainly wasn't saying and/or implying it's essential to run something like KDE or GNOME. Also, I agree there are not many useful apps specific to KDE or GNOME, Konquerer being the obvious exception. I do think, though, that people should try to be realistic. No one working with KDE code *can* make much of a change in the memory requirements. It's just the nature of KDE. There is a lot of overhead.
128MB is pretty standard, anyway, and with memory prices what they are I don't think my suggestion was in anyway outrageous even with regards to the most conservative of spender.
You state your performance with KDE is poor on a 466 Mhz Celeron w/ 64 MB ram.
...
I recommend you upgrade to 128 MB RAM, which is really the standard nowadays and is essential with the nature of UNIX desktop environments -- they require a lot of libraries to be loaded
"It is good to have a polymath representing us. Too many Linux advocates come from a narrow programming background ..."
What are you basing this statement on? Your perception of the open source community from the web sites you read?
IMNSHO, Because:
A) The replies from this person are always the same: mechanical and kiss ass toward the subject. It's like someone who blindly agrees with everything from an idol. Atleast that's the way they appear to me, and I'm sure I'm not the only one who feels this way. Someone pointed out on a serious note that it's like she's someone in disguised posting for karma, then to go on a trolling spree; while this is probably not the case, you have to agree her replies are ALWAYS the same, always in agreement with the general purposed consensus we're supposed to all have here on the given article/topic.
B) While it tries to make a valid point, she is denouncing in the post a vast majority of Linux advocates as no-nothings in terms of programming... that certainly isn't positive or fair, and it's based on what, pray tell? Her fucking Slashdot reading? Furthermore, is a strong programming background required to atleast be knowledgable regarding the strengths, programming or non-programming, of a particular OS/environment?
In conclusion, I agree with modding her down to troll, and think they should continue to do so.
"He will pay the price when he has to come face to face with his creator."
... the "eternal reward" for my obedience and observance of laws, both human nature related and legal, right doesn't fucking brighten my day, nor does "the eternal punishment" for those who have wronged me.
Lovely. I think the first message in this thread and the above quote quite possibly qualifies you as the biggest windbag on Slashdot.
If you think you're doing advocacy a favour by denouncing Microsoft's creator as an abomination and making inane claims like ".NET will be for Linux, along with Office2000, on the Microsoft Linux distro" (neverminding the GPL's protection of user from a proprietary Linux system; no one can make a Linux distribution with special core C libraries [Libc],) then think again. "Advocacy" of that nature just shows the utterly assinine "wOrld domination!!!!" attitude maintained by some in the Linux camp.
Let's be realistic about THE operating system we use, the company we dislike and religion/GOD in general. I live with far less money then the average populus makes on average
Oh, yeah, the famous DOS matrix login. I guess that came from WWiV. Ewww :)
... basically no one gave a shit.... the Vision/X and Oblivion/2 rumours came about mainly because of the stiff registration fee.... guy said FOAFF whole HD got nuked because he was running a keygen-reg'd Vision/X board.
... so that kind of sets it apart. Stock PCB is horrid. I wasn't blessed enough to see a highly modded PCB....got a copy once and it's, like others were saying, the most complicated BBS to set up.
Yeah, we were hearing even about a supposed
Renegade backdoor "from a guy who knows for a fact"
PCB had a major following by the elites. It was considered really hard if you ran it. There were file bases on this one guys board just full of every single possible PCB "mod" you could imagine. That's probably the best of the whole mod thing... I always thought mods for Renegade were stupid. It had a powerful programming language
Funny you should remember RoboBBS! I called a RoboBBS board once during the OLD days... this was like, back in 1993-1994. Boy, did it suck. Part of the fun of BBSing was the ANSI, anyhow. Some of that artwork made people look like God.
Can you point us to some of this misinformation? I'm wondering why I haven't seen it mentioned here... If propaganda against Linux hits the fan, the shit hits it *here*, accordingly. It's as consistent as an equation.
... If they fail with their endeavour, it's a failure on them.
SUN has released Staroffice's source code, given their JAVA interpreter away, etc. SGI is working on a journaling file system that will make Linux all the more enterprise ready, and they promote the MIPS port of Linux (mind you, as much as possible.) With all these kind actions toward Linux, I find it hard to believe either company would try to discredit Linux.
"I'm sad to see VA go." ?? Where has it been said they're leaving? A 25 percent staff cut == Company end? Or are you just concluding that's the case due to it's stock price? Furthermore, if VA is leaving, it is indeed their fault; They work on the embodiment of a very unique product that stands far apart from other UNIX implementations
EWWWW???
;)
Some of the best boards out there were Renegade.
You could easily search for FILE_ID.DIZ lines with excess ASCII symbols (including a repeating amount of low alphabetic ASCII characters) and have them removed -- this wasn't hard and when I was into it I wrote a QB program to do just that -- and all the stupid pissing of territory from file bases, magically removed replaced with concise descriptions. Granted, the file system wasn't the best, but it was very easy in most areas to make Renegade act right. You could even stuff keystrokes into the buffer with a certain menu function, thus eliminating the "List [*.*]?" and likewise redundant questions.
An issue during the times was the so-called "backdoor." That was another reason most people supported Renegade; a lot of people presumed Oblivion/2 contained a back door, it being "elite" software.
Oh, and you forgot PCBoard, the ultimate in ELiTE
On a lighter note, one of the largest WAREZ boards in my area ran using LoraBBS, a Remote Access clone. I guess functionality was there.