My wife is a podiatrist and amputates toes often (severe injury, infection, poor healing due to age or disease, etc.). It's something you'd rather not have happen, but certainly nothing that seriously affects your lifestyle.
It's much quicker and less annoying to the people around you to just type on your keyboard.
My wife, a doctor, pays $0.11 per line for someone to transcribe her patient notes from a tape recorder. She's from New York and speaks quickly normally, but sounds like the fast talker from the old Fed Ex commercials when she's dictating. We'd cheerfully pay $1,000 for software that could accurately recognize her speech, and gladly double that if it could automatically apply minimal formatting to the results.
If you can say you have experienced even *half* of these, let alone simultaneously and are willing to come up and admit it, *then* I can take you seriously when you come and say that you didn't say anything unprintable in that situation. Maybe.
Been there, done that but I'm not on record as wanting to nuke various African countries.
It's more than a bit hypocritical to judge someone you have not even met by his writing in *chat* in *foreign language*
Bullshit. "Nazis" and "fuck you jews" comes across pretty damn clearly. I'm relatively certain he didn't mean to say "bad people" and "I don't like you" but accidentally got the words twisted around. He said what he said.
Jani just returned from a 6 month peace-keeping tour in Afgahnistan, one of his co-workers was killed in what was called a deliberate attack on a UN position.
I was part of the peacekeeping mission in Mogadishu, Somalia. Several of my "co-workers" were killed in very deliberate attacks against US and UN forces. However, if I came home and said that I wanted to join Aryan Nations to kill me some black people, I'd be (rightfully) shunned from polite society.
I can empathize with Jani, probably more than can 99.9% of Slashdotters, but that doesn't make his outburst acceptable. Understandable, sure, but acceptable.
Even if this DOES turn out to be from him, does this really need to be posted here on Slashdot?
Yeah, it does. When someone states that they want to join the Nazis to genocide a race, that should be public information. 2AM on IRC or not, it's obvious he meant it.
And as a side not, he's screwed if this article somehow becomes the top Google hit for his name. He could pretty much forget ever working in his field again. Which, all things considered, is perfectly fine by me.
Remember, any GPLvX code can automatically be linked to any other GPLvX code (although not necessarily to GPLvX-1 code).
OK, so linking is explicitly covered. What about distribution, though? If I want to combine project Foo with project Bar to make "Super FooBar", do I have to release the result with the union of the set of their extra clauses? If so, it seems imminently likely that every piece of GPLv3ed software will eventually come to carry every extra restriction available due to its integration with other packages. And should that come to pass, those "extra optional" clauses effectively become The GPL v3.
The service industry is information in, information out, and if some of that information happens to pass through internally modifified Free Software tools, does that mean you have to open up all those tools?
And what if your modification is to pull values out of your core business logic for display? Do you have to GPL your internal codebase, or just transmit source copies with embedded tags like "<? print xmlrpc.getMagicValue('internalserver'); ?>" and let the end user deal with the fact that they don't work outside of your business environment?
I think this is a really, really bad idea. Even Debian voted to reject the GNU Free Documentation License because of similar issues. I could easily imagine them deciding to also reject the GPLv3, which would mean that software under such a license would not be admitted into Debian, and therefore probably not Ubuntu or Debian's other derivatives. I just don't see where the FSF is going with this one.
I may be an OSSer, but I have nothing against commercial code, per se. How about this?: choose the set of rules you wish to operate under. If you want to keep the code closed to make money, pay money for your code base. If you wish to use GPLed code, pay for it with GPLed code.
I have to disagree with you on this one. I'm not convinced that transmitting the output of, say, phpBB2 is the same as distributing the source of phpBB2. If I install it and modify a page, should I be obligated to make my patch available to anyone who views that page? That's not a rhetorical question, by the way, but a real issue that the GPLv3 introduces.
The same could be said of any other GPLv3ed software that uses some kind of templating system to generate output. Word processors, code generators, database frontends, drawing programs: those all incorporate parts of themselves into their end products. Should graphics drawn with The GIMP be GPL because they contain circles made by The GIMP's copyrighted code? If not, then what's the fundamental difference between The GIMP and phpBB that should restrict the output of one and not the other?
I apologize if this comes off like a troll, but I'm really curious. I don't understand this viewpoint but would be interested in seeing it logically supported.
Certainly the one recent example where one can point to a candidate getting an advantage from the electoral college favored a Republican over a Democrat, so any attempt to swing it towards a proportional vote will be greeted in red states as an attempt to make it more blue.
It would also effectively kill third-party candidacies in many states. For example, I live in an extremely red state. Come election day, I can vote Republican or Democrat, or Libertarian, Green, Populist, Communist, or Miss Piggy - the Republican's going to win anyway. That means I can give supporting votes to someone that I want to get matching funds next time around even if I don't think they can win this time. Switch that to popular vote only, though, and many of us would be unwilling to take that risk.
In short, unless you also adopt a different voting system like Condorcet or approval voting, this proposition would forever end the possibility of getting a third party elected.
First, it went up against crap like Windows 3.11 and Windows 95.
It also went up against good stuff like AmigaOS 1.1 (with color displays and preemptive multitasking since '85). Unfortunately for Apple, AmigaOS was superior in every conceivable way. Fortunately for Apple, Commodore had the worst marketing department in the history of sucky marketing departments.
But if it wasn't connected to the content of his presentation, he could have taken five minutes after as easily as he could five minutes before.
Erm, why on Earth would they want to do that? Assuming that the FBI was acting in good faith, what would be the advantage in letting a suspect have a few more minutes of freedom - possibly enough for someone to figure out what was happening and warn him? Wouldn't it be their obligation to apprehend him (and theoretically remove him from public threat) as soon as possible?
I agree with what you've said here and elsewhere in this topic, but you have to admit that witness tampering is at least a legitimate crime, and not as stupid as the straw man charges that Slashdotters were inventing and then disproving a few days ago. Maybe he's innocent (and we have to presume that he is), but at least we know that the crimes they're accusing him of could possibly be real.
Again, not saying the FBI is right, and he still deserves a presumption of innocence, but it looks like they're not as dumb as many people here wanted to believe.
Geez, all the analysis from a few days ago sounded like poor Rombom was arrested for doing private investigator stuff on a willing "victim" and that the FBI was stupidly overreacting.
That, friends, is why it's a bad idea to get worked up before you know both sides of an issue. It's too stressful to work up a righteous indignation only to find out that the other side had a valid point you didn't know about.
They've always been tremendously helpful, non-judgemental and ready to listen.
"Hi! Although you claim to be a paying customer, we've identified you as a potential thief. However, we're willing to hear your case and may even change our minds if you say the right things!"
And that, THAT, is your idea of good customer service? It's not drinking the Kool-Aid - it's taking it intravenously while swimming naked in an ocean of it.
Why do they do this? Because the average US consumer IS too damned stupid. Give them a DVD recorder remote with 52 buttons and a LCD status screen and they freak out.
Or how about this: the average US consumer isn't so infatuated by technology that they want to learn a 52-button remote. I have a degree in comp sci and have a Palm and a satellite radio sitting on my desk - I am the target market for complicate, geeky gadgets. And yet what I really want is a cellphone with ten number buttons, a "phonebook" menu, a couple of scroll keys, and Bluetooth to sync it with KAddressBook. Nothing else. No camera, no MP3 player, no video games, nothing.
It's not because I'm too stupid to figure out a more complex interface, but because I only have so many hours in a day and I'd rather spend time with my kids than dicking around with a freakin' phone, of all things. No, the American markey is different than Japan's not because we can't learn the same things (everyone in Japan is a rocket scientist and there aren't any idiots at all?) but because, by and large, we don't want to. Our priorities are different.
As someone who gets paid to make a webpage, I have (rightfully) never considered what my design will look like on a 4" screen with a 66pt font.
Good! I just stole one of your clients because he could check his order status on our website with his cellphone. Keep it up - we love the extra business!
Re:Comments from people who actually create Creati
on
Beginning GIMP
·
· Score: 1
Not to mention that the tutorial makes me want to punch someone. I know what the hell a mouse is, thanks. Just tell me to press the shift key and be done with it!
With all do respect, I shouldn't have to be a "decent" web designer to be able to put up a personal homepage that looks the same in all browsers.
You're halfway right, but only in that decent web designers understand that their pages won't look the same in all browsers. That's the nature of the medium. If you can't truly come to grips with that concept and work with it instead of against it, then you'll never become good.
Again, web is not print, and you're only hurting yourself if you try to treat it as such. Real web design recognizes that users have different browsers, operating systems, plugins, extensions, fonts, sizes, monitors, gamuts, resolutions, DPIs, and so on. It is completely, utterly impossible to make an end run around those differences. Either make a design that scales and flows well on every client you can get your hands on (including Lynx and cell phones), or make a pretty PDF and be done with it.
I'd imagine that the only circumstances where someone might have to input contrary data to plain alphanumerics might be inside corporate sites, but then wouldn't there be security in place to ensure that only valid users have logged in, again with nothing more than alphanumeric characters?
No offense, but that's insane. If I'm sloppy with a toy website at home, then some random visitor can get access to all the pictures of my kids playing in the front yard, not just the ones I actually published. If I'm sloppy with our corporate website, then some random employee can get access to the company financials, payroll, customer lists, etc.
I work in a relatively small company where I trust everyone, but I'm still in full paranoid mode whenever I allow them to enter data.
/me makes a note never to hire someone with the nickname "embracethenerdwithin".
You beat me to it. What you just said, innernerd, was that you consider yourself a jack-of-all-imperative-languages and that you hate things that don't look like Algol. That's like saying that you're a linguist because you can speak American, British, and Australian English (but never really tried Spanish, Russian, or Japanese).
It's too bad, really, because there's a lot of fun and profit to be had in the non-imperative realm. I hope you can see that some day.
Slashdot Mirror
My wife is a podiatrist and amputates toes often (severe injury, infection, poor healing due to age or disease, etc.). It's something you'd rather not have happen, but certainly nothing that seriously affects your lifestyle.
On behalf of everyone in the US who doesn't live in Boston, your amazing, proud, pretty 15 billion dollar debacle can kiss my taxpaying ass.
My wife, a doctor, pays $0.11 per line for someone to transcribe her patient notes from a tape recorder. She's from New York and speaks quickly normally, but sounds like the fast talker from the old Fed Ex commercials when she's dictating. We'd cheerfully pay $1,000 for software that could accurately recognize her speech, and gladly double that if it could automatically apply minimal formatting to the results.
Been there, done that but I'm not on record as wanting to nuke various African countries.
Bullshit. "Nazis" and "fuck you jews" comes across pretty damn clearly. I'm relatively certain he didn't mean to say "bad people" and "I don't like you" but accidentally got the words twisted around. He said what he said.
Dang it! Sigh.
I was part of the peacekeeping mission in Mogadishu, Somalia. Several of my "co-workers" were killed in very deliberate attacks against US and UN forces. However, if I came home and said that I wanted to join Aryan Nations to kill me some black people, I'd be (rightfully) shunned from polite society.
I can empathize with Jani, probably more than can 99.9% of Slashdotters, but that doesn't make his outburst acceptable. Understandable, sure, but acceptable.
Yeah, it does. When someone states that they want to join the Nazis to genocide a race, that should be public information. 2AM on IRC or not, it's obvious he meant it.
And as a side not, he's screwed if this article somehow becomes the top Google hit for his name. He could pretty much forget ever working in his field again. Which, all things considered, is perfectly fine by me.
OK, so linking is explicitly covered. What about distribution, though? If I want to combine project Foo with project Bar to make "Super FooBar", do I have to release the result with the union of the set of their extra clauses? If so, it seems imminently likely that every piece of GPLv3ed software will eventually come to carry every extra restriction available due to its integration with other packages. And should that come to pass, those "extra optional" clauses effectively become The GPL v3.
And what if your modification is to pull values out of your core business logic for display? Do you have to GPL your internal codebase, or just transmit source copies with embedded tags like "<? print xmlrpc.getMagicValue('internalserver'); ?>" and let the end user deal with the fact that they don't work outside of your business environment?
I think this is a really, really bad idea. Even Debian voted to reject the GNU Free Documentation License because of similar issues. I could easily imagine them deciding to also reject the GPLv3, which would mean that software under such a license would not be admitted into Debian, and therefore probably not Ubuntu or Debian's other derivatives. I just don't see where the FSF is going with this one.
I have to disagree with you on this one. I'm not convinced that transmitting the output of, say, phpBB2 is the same as distributing the source of phpBB2. If I install it and modify a page, should I be obligated to make my patch available to anyone who views that page? That's not a rhetorical question, by the way, but a real issue that the GPLv3 introduces.
The same could be said of any other GPLv3ed software that uses some kind of templating system to generate output. Word processors, code generators, database frontends, drawing programs: those all incorporate parts of themselves into their end products. Should graphics drawn with The GIMP be GPL because they contain circles made by The GIMP's copyrighted code? If not, then what's the fundamental difference between The GIMP and phpBB that should restrict the output of one and not the other?
I apologize if this comes off like a troll, but I'm really curious. I don't understand this viewpoint but would be interested in seeing it logically supported.
It would also effectively kill third-party candidacies in many states. For example, I live in an extremely red state. Come election day, I can vote Republican or Democrat, or Libertarian, Green, Populist, Communist, or Miss Piggy - the Republican's going to win anyway. That means I can give supporting votes to someone that I want to get matching funds next time around even if I don't think they can win this time. Switch that to popular vote only, though, and many of us would be unwilling to take that risk.
In short, unless you also adopt a different voting system like Condorcet or approval voting, this proposition would forever end the possibility of getting a third party elected.
It also went up against good stuff like AmigaOS 1.1 (with color displays and preemptive multitasking since '85). Unfortunately for Apple, AmigaOS was superior in every conceivable way. Fortunately for Apple, Commodore had the worst marketing department in the history of sucky marketing departments.
Hey, Taco, can we have a new "upper threshold" for browsing comments? Because if this comment is "+4: Informative", I don't think I can handle +5.
Erm, why on Earth would they want to do that? Assuming that the FBI was acting in good faith, what would be the advantage in letting a suspect have a few more minutes of freedom - possibly enough for someone to figure out what was happening and warn him? Wouldn't it be their obligation to apprehend him (and theoretically remove him from public threat) as soon as possible?
Again, not saying the FBI is right, and he still deserves a presumption of innocence, but it looks like they're not as dumb as many people here wanted to believe.
That, friends, is why it's a bad idea to get worked up before you know both sides of an issue. It's too stressful to work up a righteous indignation only to find out that the other side had a valid point you didn't know about.
You misspelled "outshipped". There's a stack of PSPs at Wal-Mart, but I can't find a DS Lite in my whole city.
And don't forget "Animal Crossing". We had to get a second DS for her so I could have mine back.
"Hi! Although you claim to be a paying customer, we've identified you as a potential thief. However, we're willing to hear your case and may even change our minds if you say the right things!"
And that, THAT, is your idea of good customer service? It's not drinking the Kool-Aid - it's taking it intravenously while swimming naked in an ocean of it.
Or how about this: the average US consumer isn't so infatuated by technology that they want to learn a 52-button remote. I have a degree in comp sci and have a Palm and a satellite radio sitting on my desk - I am the target market for complicate, geeky gadgets. And yet what I really want is a cellphone with ten number buttons, a "phonebook" menu, a couple of scroll keys, and Bluetooth to sync it with KAddressBook. Nothing else. No camera, no MP3 player, no video games, nothing.
It's not because I'm too stupid to figure out a more complex interface, but because I only have so many hours in a day and I'd rather spend time with my kids than dicking around with a freakin' phone, of all things. No, the American markey is different than Japan's not because we can't learn the same things (everyone in Japan is a rocket scientist and there aren't any idiots at all?) but because, by and large, we don't want to. Our priorities are different.
Good! I just stole one of your clients because he could check his order status on our website with his cellphone. Keep it up - we love the extra business!
Not to mention that the tutorial makes me want to punch someone. I know what the hell a mouse is, thanks. Just tell me to press the shift key and be done with it!
You're halfway right, but only in that decent web designers understand that their pages won't look the same in all browsers. That's the nature of the medium. If you can't truly come to grips with that concept and work with it instead of against it, then you'll never become good.
Again, web is not print, and you're only hurting yourself if you try to treat it as such. Real web design recognizes that users have different browsers, operating systems, plugins, extensions, fonts, sizes, monitors, gamuts, resolutions, DPIs, and so on. It is completely, utterly impossible to make an end run around those differences. Either make a design that scales and flows well on every client you can get your hands on (including Lynx and cell phones), or make a pretty PDF and be done with it.
No offense, but that's insane. If I'm sloppy with a toy website at home, then some random visitor can get access to all the pictures of my kids playing in the front yard, not just the ones I actually published. If I'm sloppy with our corporate website, then some random employee can get access to the company financials, payroll, customer lists, etc.
I work in a relatively small company where I trust everyone, but I'm still in full paranoid mode whenever I allow them to enter data.
You beat me to it. What you just said, innernerd, was that you consider yourself a jack-of-all-imperative-languages and that you hate things that don't look like Algol. That's like saying that you're a linguist because you can speak American, British, and Australian English (but never really tried Spanish, Russian, or Japanese).
It's too bad, really, because there's a lot of fun and profit to be had in the non-imperative realm. I hope you can see that some day.