I disagree.... all this would mean is that someone like microsoft would now get microsoft.* instead of just microsoft.[com|net|org]. Ditto with other companies. I don't disagree with adding more TLDs, but I disagree that this will lead to the end of the BS.
Besides, if you have a company, or product that is say, the "netshredder". Nowadays, people look for you automatically at netshredder.com. Where do they go now? netshredder.ustm?.gtm?.com?.product?
I personally think that we need a *better* way of handling domains that is "product" friendly... A search engine built into a browser so that you type in "netshredder" it presents you with a list of the netshredder.* sites and a brief description of them? Something like that. Don't tell me that search engines do that these days... some are better than others, but they are far, *FAR* from perfect, nor usable "search for "breast cancer" and the like...).
Oh I'm not counting them out, or saying they don't have market share (with the MS machine behind the wheel I'm surprised palm hasn't simply dissapeared yet).
I didn't know that the OS was a ground up effort however.
My main point though was that the Look and Feel of the win9x/nt/w2k/winme desktop didn't work (IMHO) as well as something like the palmos on handhelds. The entire paradigm of windows, start menus, etc is not the way to do it. I admit that my time using a wince/pocketpc handheld was restricted to ~30 seconds, in which time I randomly hit a couple of buttons (wondering what they did) and it crashed with a gpf. Nope, not kidding at all:)
I belive that the "new structure" is referring to mostly backend changes. The front end from what I understand from conversation on the gimp-dev list will not change drastically. The backend however has a lot of leftover code from the beginnings of gimp and gtk, when there was no established object system yet. Now there is, I think the idea is to move the GIMPs backend data structures and layout to a "real" object system.
Don't forget that just because they don't have usb and 16 bit color doesn't mean a huge amount... I have a palm because I prefer it's OS to windows, and I feel that the way that the palmOS works is a much better way of doing it (from scratch, designed for handhelds) then trying to shoehorn a desktop OS (windows) onto a handheld (wince/whatever).
Windows is not designed for being used on a handheld IMHO, and even though the coders at MS worked very hard to get it to work on the handhelp processer, that doesn't escape the fact that you are using a desktop OS, or rather, a *desktop user interface*, on a handhelp PC. Why do I need a start menu etc? MS should have done what palm did and start from the ground up. Sure, keep some of the L&F of the "familiar" OS, but don't try to force a round peg into a square hole.
Agreed, I have my servers chugging on the compile now..... Thank you for a canadian mirror:)
Re:I know I'll be modded down, but bear with me he
on
Warez and Abandonware
·
· Score: 1
To extend your house analogy, what happens when the owners of the house die and the house and it's contents just sit there...?
Do you leave everything there, sitting and rotting till the end of time or do you declare salvage rights (I belive this is what it's called in the naval side of things (or maybe it's star trek, who knows anymore)) and let someone at it?
If a game isn't being sold anymore then I'd have to agree with you (sort of), but for dead companies, I vote free for all!
Yes, you could practically hum along with the Imperial Death March. Yes, the acting was not first class. Yes, it was campy at best.
Exactly what I expected.
I personally wasn't dissapointed at all. I'm not a DnD player, and have played maybe 3 times in my life. I couldn't tell you that red dragons are always chaotic evil, or the exact names of the spells used (though I hear that about 99% of them were made up for the movie). But I did enjoy the movie. Why? Because it was what I expected.
When I went to see "Battlefield: Earth", probably the worst movie around in the last year, I went in *knowing* that it was bad (I read all the reviews first of course) so I went in expecting nothing more than a fun and cheesy sci-fi movie. And that was exactly what I got.
With DnD I knew that it was going to be a campy fantasy movie, so I wasn't terribly dissapointed. In the movie I laughed, I jumped, and to be honest, had a good time. My SO gnawed on my shoulder in the tense bits, and when the director said "ok, now we make the audience jump by making something jump out unexpectedly", I did.
On the plus side I though that the sets were awsome, the costuming was great (except that the red dragon army guys seemed to stick out from the rest of the crowd a bit too much... maybe the metal on their armor was just a wee bit too bright), and the CGI was (mostly) fantastic. I have to say that the dragon battle was, in a word, breathtaking. The long swooping shots of buildings were also very impressive.
Again, I'm not a hard core DnD guy by any means, so I wasn't mortally offended when [insert some DnD mortal offense committed by the movie here].
Interesting thought. I was thinking that perhaps they wrote everything themselves (DoDOS?). Backdoors are a tricky thing too, see the jargon file entry about the famous gcc hack.
I think this could be simply natural evolution. The Internet has all but replaced BBSs for the "community" aspect, and yet internet BBSs have replaced "traditional" dial up BBSs (from what I've seen anyway). Even community boards like/. and k5 have been substituting for the message boards that I once spent all my time in (though I gotta admit warez were easier to find back before the days of pop up ads!).
Perhaps internet collaboration will replace real life clubs and get-togeathers in time. I am still part of a linux user group, and while we haven't invented something as cool as GTK or the GIMP it certainly is nice to have real life people to just completely geek out with. Perhaps video conferenceing will someday replace real life clubs, or some other way of "getting togeather"... who knows?
The Jackson character never says he is the opposite of the Willis character. Oh, he implies it a lot, and the screenplay leads us in that rather obvious direction. But even
at the end, Jackson never directly says he is the opposite of Willis. My theory, then, is that Jackson is not the villain that everyone assumes is the lame ending.
I disagree, I do believe that towards the end of the movie Jackson states something along the lines of "don't you see, we're opposites you and I". Or perhaps it was around the time when the weakness (water) thing was discussed. I am 99.9% sure that he does state this though.
Even if he's not the villian, he is insane, and if the movie is part 1, he could be the nutso-dude-who-makes-the-hero-find-himself character, and some major baddie is yet to reveal himself.
This movie in a way had the feel of the X-Men movie, where a lot of it is simply explaining things and building up to something more interesting down the road.
Well, as someone how has probably never owned a comic book in his life (much less collected them) I loved it. The movie was slow, yes, but (and I almost hate to say it) I agree with Katz, the pacing and camera work did add a lot to the film.
I personally didn't have a clue where the movie was going when I went to see it. The trailers left out 99% of what the movie was about, and I though that that was *great*. I was completely unprepared for what I was given, and glad for it. Not the best movie I've seen, but still an excellent flick!
Mod this up! Important news for the.ca people out there!
Like me, who is happy that it will be showing eventually on the space channel.... I was afraid I'd have to buy it on dvd or drive down to the states and steal someone's house for the miniseries:)
Yea, we did 1-8 + smeg offs. Started ~9am saturday, ended sometime late sunday night. We had contests to see who would be the first to fall asleep. I'm ashamed to admit that I bailed sunday sometime, seeing as I couldn't see straight much less stay awake:)
Sure, but why bother with the half-assed attempt? This sounds very much like a salesdroid idea. "Tell them that using encrypted mail will make them secure!"
Sorry, no dice. There is/no/ one sure way to be secure, but there are ways to be/more/ secure. Security is a process and all that.
In a way they are lying to customers as well. What happens when random-megacorp decides to do all their email through yahoo now, sends all sorts of stuff that should be private, only it's sniffed or stolen from yahoo. Or something like that.
The end result is they say that it's encrypted but in fact it's unencrypted on the server, and in the transaction on upload.
Last time I checked there were people starving on the streets of vancouver, new york, and all throughout the "civilized" centers of the world. I'm pretty sure that you don't consider Bill Clinton a "evil militaristic asshole". Starving people isn't always some cartoon-like evil dictator who can simply be killed and all the problems go away. It's education, society, distribution of wealth, etc.
I'm probably missing some huge point, or not clear on the concept (and I'm sure I'll be reminded of that if it is the case), but why can't they do this? If I run a site and I don't want to see swear words (personally I don't fucking care myself:) don't I have the right to filter out?
If NSI doesn't want to allow certain words to searched on, or domains to be registered, why can't they? They are a company just like everyone else, and just because everyone wants a *fuck*.com address, does that mean they have to let them? Hallmark doesn't have to use every greeting card idea sent to them, and a car dealership has the right to kick your ass off their lot if you're wandering around with a sign saying "fuck everyone". Ok, streching a bit I know....:)
Anyway, just my thoughts... I don't agree with them, but I don't nesissarily think that they (the company) has no say in what they do.
So what? The letter talks about "converting all the gnome users" a couple of times, and I really think this is the wrong attitude. Yes, competetion is good, but this is almost genicide. The end result of most religious (vim/emacs, linux/*bsd, gnome/kde) wars is "use whatever works for you". I think an attitude more like this might have been a better way to present things. Who cares about what percentage of people out there use gnome vs. kde? Does this really matter? I say no, and I think a lot more would get done in the DE and development of these toolkits if people remembered that.
What they *should* be doing is trying to make things like DnD work between gnome and kde apps, as well as sharing components, themes, etc. I don't care if an app is written in kde or gnome, I just want it to work and to work as expected. If I like randomgnomemailer, but I do my PIM in randomkdepim, I'd like to share or at least transfer information between the two. This is what I think all users want and what will help linux out in the desktop "war".
This is where microsoft and windows has it right. One wiget set and one set of core libs (for the sake of argument anyway) means that DnD always works (as long as the programmer of the application has put the code in), widgets always work the same and things are generally more "user friendly" because there are no gotchas ("sorry, you can't use this program without this other program installed, and there is NO way to get that other program to work with either of them, you'll have to use this other program instead").
I can't get any of the results to compile:( Not sure if that's an error on my side or on the webmaster for not putting the code in right. Anyone got any of these to compile and run properly? Links?
After the 10 min I used ns6 I loaded ufies.org and then skinz.org and then it crashed. Based on this lets just say I'm not eagerly anticipating ns6.1:)
Regarding ie's ties back to microsoft... I belive that the default bookmarks are tied through, ie: the "travel" default shortcut is a link to microsoft.com/evil_counting_program?redirect=trave l.com
or something along those lines.
Netscape's are more blatent than ie's, but they are there...
Let me also suggest Galeon, another mozilla based browser. no frills, stable, and sweet. Still missing some things, but definately something to look at for no frills browsing.
Slashdot Mirror
I disagree.... all this would mean is that someone like microsoft would now get microsoft.* instead of just microsoft.[com|net|org]. Ditto with other companies. I don't disagree with adding more TLDs, but I disagree that this will lead to the end of the BS.
.gtm? .com? .product?
Besides, if you have a company, or product that is say, the "netshredder". Nowadays, people look for you automatically at netshredder.com. Where do they go now? netshredder.ustm?
I personally think that we need a *better* way of handling domains that is "product" friendly... A search engine built into a browser so that you type in "netshredder" it presents you with a list of the netshredder.* sites and a brief description of them? Something like that. Don't tell me that search engines do that these days... some are better than others, but they are far, *FAR* from perfect, nor usable "search for "breast cancer" and the like...).
That's quite possibly the most disturbing image I've had in a long time.....
I saw RMS dancing the funky chicken at LWE in san jose last year too, I've barely recovered from *that*!
Oh I'm not counting them out, or saying they don't have market share (with the MS machine behind the wheel I'm surprised palm hasn't simply dissapeared yet).
:)
I didn't know that the OS was a ground up effort however.
My main point though was that the Look and Feel of the win9x/nt/w2k/winme desktop didn't work (IMHO) as well as something like the palmos on handhelds. The entire paradigm of windows, start menus, etc is not the way to do it. I admit that my time using a wince/pocketpc handheld was restricted to ~30 seconds, in which time I randomly hit a couple of buttons (wondering what they did) and it crashed with a gpf. Nope, not kidding at all
But I digress....
I belive that the "new structure" is referring to mostly backend changes. The front end from what I understand from conversation on the gimp-dev list will not change drastically. The backend however has a lot of leftover code from the beginnings of gimp and gtk, when there was no established object system yet. Now there is, I think the idea is to move the GIMPs backend data structures and layout to a "real" object system.
Don't forget that just because they don't have usb and 16 bit color doesn't mean a huge amount... I have a palm because I prefer it's OS to windows, and I feel that the way that the palmOS works is a much better way of doing it (from scratch, designed for handhelds) then trying to shoehorn a desktop OS (windows) onto a handheld (wince/whatever).
Windows is not designed for being used on a handheld IMHO, and even though the coders at MS worked very hard to get it to work on the handhelp processer, that doesn't escape the fact that you are using a desktop OS, or rather, a *desktop user interface*, on a handhelp PC. Why do I need a start menu etc? MS should have done what palm did and start from the ground up. Sure, keep some of the L&F of the "familiar" OS, but don't try to force a round peg into a square hole.
My $0.02
Agreed, I have my servers chugging on the compile now..... Thank you for a canadian mirror :)
To extend your house analogy, what happens when the owners of the house die and the house and it's contents just sit there...?
Do you leave everything there, sitting and rotting till the end of time or do you declare salvage rights (I belive this is what it's called in the naval side of things (or maybe it's star trek, who knows anymore)) and let someone at it?
If a game isn't being sold anymore then I'd have to agree with you (sort of), but for dead companies, I vote free for all!
Yes, you could practically hum along with the Imperial Death March. Yes, the acting was not first class. Yes, it was campy at best.
Exactly what I expected.
I personally wasn't dissapointed at all. I'm not a DnD player, and have played maybe 3 times in my life. I couldn't tell you that red dragons are always chaotic evil, or the exact names of the spells used (though I hear that about 99% of them were made up for the movie). But I did enjoy the movie. Why? Because it was what I expected.
When I went to see "Battlefield: Earth", probably the worst movie around in the last year, I went in *knowing* that it was bad (I read all the reviews first of course) so I went in expecting nothing more than a fun and cheesy sci-fi movie. And that was exactly what I got.
With DnD I knew that it was going to be a campy fantasy movie, so I wasn't terribly dissapointed. In the movie I laughed, I jumped, and to be honest, had a good time. My SO gnawed on my shoulder in the tense bits, and when the director said "ok, now we make the audience jump by making something jump out unexpectedly", I did.
On the plus side I though that the sets were awsome, the costuming was great (except that the red dragon army guys seemed to stick out from the rest of the crowd a bit too much... maybe the metal on their armor was just a wee bit too bright), and the CGI was (mostly) fantastic. I have to say that the dragon battle was, in a word, breathtaking. The long swooping shots of buildings were also very impressive.
Again, I'm not a hard core DnD guy by any means, so I wasn't mortally offended when [insert some DnD mortal offense committed by the movie here].
My $0.02
Interesting thought. I was thinking that perhaps they wrote everything themselves (DoDOS?). Backdoors are a tricky thing too, see the jargon file entry about the famous gcc hack.
I think this could be simply natural evolution. The Internet has all but replaced BBSs for the "community" aspect, and yet internet BBSs have replaced "traditional" dial up BBSs (from what I've seen anyway). Even community boards like /. and k5 have been substituting for the message boards that I once spent all my time in (though I gotta admit warez were easier to find back before the days of pop up ads!).
Perhaps internet collaboration will replace real life clubs and get-togeathers in time. I am still part of a linux user group, and while we haven't invented something as cool as GTK or the GIMP it certainly is nice to have real life people to just completely geek out with. Perhaps video conferenceing will someday replace real life clubs, or some other way of "getting togeather"... who knows?
I disagree, I do believe that towards the end of the movie Jackson states something along the lines of "don't you see, we're opposites you and I". Or perhaps it was around the time when the weakness (water) thing was discussed. I am 99.9% sure that he does state this though.
Even if he's not the villian, he is insane, and if the movie is part 1, he could be the nutso-dude-who-makes-the-hero-find-himself character, and some major baddie is yet to reveal himself.
This movie in a way had the feel of the X-Men movie, where a lot of it is simply explaining things and building up to something more interesting down the road.
Looking forward to part II/III though!
Well, as someone how has probably never owned a comic book in his life (much less collected them) I loved it. The movie was slow, yes, but (and I almost hate to say it) I agree with Katz, the pacing and camera work did add a lot to the film.
I personally didn't have a clue where the movie was going when I went to see it. The trailers left out 99% of what the movie was about, and I though that that was *great*. I was completely unprepared for what I was given, and glad for it. Not the best movie I've seen, but still an excellent flick!
Mod this up! Important news for the .ca people out there!
:)
Like me, who is happy that it will be showing eventually on the space channel.... I was afraid I'd have to buy it on dvd or drive down to the states and steal someone's house for the miniseries
Yea, we did 1-8 + smeg offs. Started ~9am saturday, ended sometime late sunday night. We had contests to see who would be the first to fall asleep. I'm ashamed to admit that I bailed sunday sometime, seeing as I couldn't see straight much less stay awake :)
There's nothing to see here.
Move along.
</hand wave>
Sure, but why bother with the half-assed attempt? This sounds very much like a salesdroid idea. "Tell them that using encrypted mail will make them secure!"
/no/ one sure way to be secure, but there are ways to be /more/ secure. Security is a process and all that.
Sorry, no dice. There is
In a way they are lying to customers as well. What happens when random-megacorp decides to do all their email through yahoo now, sends all sorts of stuff that should be private, only it's sniffed or stolen from yahoo. Or something like that.
The end result is they say that it's encrypted but in fact it's unencrypted on the server, and in the transaction on upload.
Awh come on rob, I wanna read about the robots and their brave leader Litmus!
:)
Last time I checked there were people starving on the streets of vancouver, new york, and all throughout the "civilized" centers of the world. I'm pretty sure that you don't consider Bill Clinton a "evil militaristic asshole". Starving people isn't always some cartoon-like evil dictator who can simply be killed and all the problems go away. It's education, society, distribution of wealth, etc.
I'm probably missing some huge point, or not clear on the concept (and I'm sure I'll be reminded of that if it is the case), but why can't they do this? If I run a site and I don't want to see swear words (personally I don't fucking care myself :) don't I have the right to filter out?
:)
If NSI doesn't want to allow certain words to searched on, or domains to be registered, why can't they? They are a company just like everyone else, and just because everyone wants a *fuck*.com address, does that mean they have to let them? Hallmark doesn't have to use every greeting card idea sent to them, and a car dealership has the right to kick your ass off their lot if you're wandering around with a sign saying "fuck everyone". Ok, streching a bit I know....
Anyway, just my thoughts... I don't agree with them, but I don't nesissarily think that they (the company) has no say in what they do.
Wow, this sounds like what /. is doing to the poor guys site right now, only with HTTP :)
So what? The letter talks about "converting all the gnome users" a couple of times, and I really think this is the wrong attitude. Yes, competetion is good, but this is almost genicide. The end result of most religious (vim/emacs, linux/*bsd, gnome/kde) wars is "use whatever works for you". I think an attitude more like this might have been a better way to present things. Who cares about what percentage of people out there use gnome vs. kde? Does this really matter? I say no, and I think a lot more would get done in the DE and development of these toolkits if people remembered that.
What they *should* be doing is trying to make things like DnD work between gnome and kde apps, as well as sharing components, themes, etc. I don't care if an app is written in kde or gnome, I just want it to work and to work as expected. If I like randomgnomemailer, but I do my PIM in randomkdepim, I'd like to share or at least transfer information between the two. This is what I think all users want and what will help linux out in the desktop "war".
This is where microsoft and windows has it right. One wiget set and one set of core libs (for the sake of argument anyway) means that DnD always works (as long as the programmer of the application has put the code in), widgets always work the same and things are generally more "user friendly" because there are no gotchas ("sorry, you can't use this program without this other program installed, and there is NO way to get that other program to work with either of them, you'll have to use this other program instead").
I can't get any of the results to compile :( Not sure if that's an error on my side or on the webmaster for not putting the code in right. Anyone got any of these to compile and run properly? Links?
After the 10 min I used ns6 I loaded ufies.org and then skinz.org and then it crashed. Based on this lets just say I'm not eagerly anticipating ns6.1 :)
Regarding ie's ties back to microsoft... I belive that the default bookmarks are tied through, ie: the "travel" default shortcut is a link to microsoft.com/evil_counting_program?redirect=trave l.com
or something along those lines.
Netscape's are more blatent than ie's, but they are there...
Let me also suggest Galeon, another mozilla based browser. no frills, stable, and sweet. Still missing some things, but definately something to look at for no frills browsing.