A couple quotes from the article that made my jaw drop simply due to their mention:
OpenOffice can't run macros written in Microsoft's programming language, either. (On the bright side, you're therefore safe from Word and Excel macro viruses.)
I don't know if macro viruses are still floating around in the wild, but in a computer-illiterate, yet paranoid user culture, this may prove to be an important selling point. Time will tell if StarBasic can be used for similar abuses.
The article notes a few things that, if I understand correctly, OOo does better than MSO:
It's nice to have a proper Font menu (showing font names in their actual typefaces) at the top of the window, instead of on a toolbar that may not be open. It's also a pleasure to be able to open any kind of OpenOffice document (text, spreadsheet, presentation, drawing) from the File menu of any of its programs. [...] Both Word and OpenOffice Writer let you set up abbreviations that when typed expand into longer words or phrases. But only OpenOffice offers to complete frequently used long words automatically, which quickly becomes a huge timesaver.
If you listen to Bill's Legions, MSO is the all-singing, all-dancing crap of the world that can do everything you can think of and more. I would appreciate being corrected here if MSO does the above, and I'd be surprised if it didn't.
Fortunately, the open-source nature of OpenOffice.org holds tantalizing promise for improved versions. Anyone is permitted, even encouraged, to submit bug reports, wish lists of features and other feedback via the Web site. As a new droplet in the tidal wave of the open-source movement, you may even experience the thrill of watching your tiny input have an effect on the next version.
*jumps up and down like a moron on speed*
This is what keeps me coming back to OSS efforts. I may not be able to program worth a lick, but I can still directly contribute to the improvement of a program I use and interact with the programmers as if they're human beings, instead of distant gods on top of a mountain of C code somewhere. I think this aspect of the Mozilla project should have been screamed to the heavens even more than it was to the users, the idea that Joe User could make a solid, tangible contribution to making their computers easier and better, rather than waiting for God Gates to bestow His latest Blessings upon the unwashed masses. Maybe it's due to my anarchist leanings, but I think we're better when we work together and listen to the people affected by our decisions and our work, instead of assuming I, and I alone, know what's best for everyone else.
Give a person a taste of the power, freedom, and agency s/he can have as an individual among many, and that person will never want to give it up. It's a liberating feeling.
Agreed - this is the best way to do it on a multiuser-oriented operating system. I actually have a script in/etc/skel that allows the user to run the workstation install from a desktop icon. I'm not sure if any $HOME-specific settings are registered upon workstation install, so I'm a bit queasy about simply tossing an OpenOffice.org1.0 directory into/etc/skel. It's a bit of a kludge, and Ximian offers RPMs with a skeleton directory, but it works.
To my fellow OOo users running under GNOME, you may have encountered a problem where the program will often fail to start properly. This is not a crash. OOo is simply being purged by the GNOME session manager due to its relatively long startup time. I was a bit surprised to encounter this problem in 1.0, having thought it an OO bug. However, this article led me to search Issuezilla for a solution, which thankfully was determined.
There are a couple ways around the purge. The easiest one is to add "unset SESSION_MANAGER" to the soffice startup script. One file, all GNOME users happy. A somewhat more intrusive and wide-ranging solution is to add "exec $PATH_TO_GNOME-SESSION/gnome-session --purge-delay=0" to ~/.gnomerc. Supposedly, this will solve a similar problem with Opera, according to the bug comments.
(not to mention our own new-anarchist Slashdot:-) [...] In short, it is news by consensus.
Someone else pointed out that the correct term is "neo-anarchist", and second, it's not really anarchist. It's more of a dictatorship, quite frankly. The articles to be discussed are chosen by an unelected group of editors, and we just get to rant. "News by consensus" would imply that the editors decide collectively which stories will be posted, all stories were unanimously agreed upon, and tossing in the word "anarchist" implies that all participants have a say in which stories are posted, instead of the unchosen few. It sounds a bit harsh, but at 3 am, I can't think of a nicer way to explain it:)
A slightly better example might be Indymedia's features. The center-column stories are developed by individuals or groups, and they're posted and edited on a collective, consensus basis. Anyone may submit a feature to any IMC (generally, it's good to try to make a feature relevant to the local IMC you're submitting to, though this varies greatly), and anyone can get involved in the editing and decision process.
Admittedly, the consensus process breaks down for breaking stories, as someone occasionally takes initiative and posts a hot story in a features column, but editing and development continues collaboratively.
This is mostly based on my observations of and occasional participation in the "global" features collective; some locals have a similar style of features development, some rely heavily on dedicated volunteers to handle development. A few rely on one or two people, simply due to a lack of volunteers.
Newsmax, from what I gather, is like a "traditional" newsroom, only really right-wing, and Drudge is the man himself plugged in to everywhere and posting anything hot. It's his site, dammit, and he'll do what he wants:)
Hashing out new ways of using a powerful medium is fun!
It works beautifully, and Nautilus will run with an incorrect Mozilla version anyway; it just won't access Web pages, probably due to a version check while loading the Gecko library.
As I type this, the party tracking page indicates that 1873 people are attending Mozilla release parties around the world.
I don't know what this says about the Mozilla community - that so many people are willing to party over a freaking browser release, that we're h4rdc0r3, d00d, or that we never get out.
1) It's Mike Ruppert, not Vreeland. Delmart "Mike" Vreeland is either a former Navy officer with a thing for identify theft and credit card fraud, or a Navy intelligence officer with some scary info, depending who you ask on which day. Ruppert loved the guy at first, but some of his more erratic behaviour and dodging is making him a bit wary.
Ruppert is a former LA cop who was supposedly fired in 1978 while trying to expose CIA involvement in LA drug dealing activities. Journalist Gary Webb saw his career torn to shreds for reporting similar happenings a few years ago in the San Jose Mercury.
2) Corn and Ruppert have an ongoing, somewhat nasty rivalry. The article you link elicited this response from Ruppert.
I have this shirt in my closet (well, it's in my laundry basket right now, but you get the idea) that I'm rather happy to have. I got it from ThinkGeek a couple years ago. It takes a rather cute shot at the USPTO, with a certain someone's signature emblazoned under the text.
"All good things...", I suppose, though I still can't get the "skunky beer" look off my face right now. I hate when reality sticks its nose into my idealism.
I wouldn't be doing unless I was *convinced* this was the only way to do things in the short term, and that generic GPL use would be granted.
First thing: whenever I see someone take an action they would normally be stringently against due to "short term" considerations, alarms go off in my head. In my 22 short years, I've noticed that short-term gains made against principles can cause long-term problems. You're almost certainly far wiser than me about how the "real world" works, but something about the whole thing just seems... off, I dunno.
Second thing, potentially exposing my lack of understanding about certain patent-related issues: It's my understanding that if a patent is not defended by the holder, the protection may be ruled unenforceable later. This is partly the reason for many of the stupid patent fights, and the raison d'etre of several companies that do nothing but purchase and "offensively defend" patents. I imagine some legal beagle over at RH came up with a great answer for this, but would allowing distribution of code implementing the patents under the GPL potentially allow certain competitors to later challenge the validity of the patent protection by arguing that early free distribution of said code indicates a lack of concern about patent protection? I have some trouble explaining precisely what I mean, but could there be a potential conflict between the aspects of the GPL meant to ensure unfettered, open distribution of code and the patent system's requirement that patents be defended if the holder intends to control use of the patented technology or process?
I think the answer is "no", as I don't recall hearing any limits on how a patented technology can be licensed, and I think my above concerns are unwarranted due to the intent behind the GPL; it wouldn't be as if the patent-implementing code would be released as closed-source without legal raising hell over other implementations of the code.
Or is this exactly the intent; patent code, license it under the GPL, and go after any patent implementations that aren't derived from or released as GPL code?
Lots of meandering questions and thoughts, so some clarity from a knowledgable person would be wonderful.
Absolutely, considering that the US devised nukes during WWII and the Germans did not. Not that it matters.
Nuclear fission was discovered by a German scientist, Lise Meitner. Once word of the discovery got out, Einstein (German) wrote a letter to FDR warning of the possibility of Nazi Germany getting the bomb. The Manhattan Project was a crash program to make sure the Germans didn't get there first.
The reason most western governments aren't massively funding space exploration is because they are (by and large) run by a democracy that is forced to listen to the people
Not even "by and large"; western governments are run by people supposedly chosen to represent the millions, but in reality represent only themselves, basing their decisions to a great, great extent on what will help them maintain their exalted, feted position when the next election rolls around. The population thinks the representatives are voting based on what "the people" want. It's a comfortable illusion, and an ultimately dangerous one.
right now, the attitude of the people is screw space, we have bigger problems, like 3rd world debt, growing the economy and reducing our dependance on oil.
Except I don't think a lot of people in the U.S. pay much mind to third world debt, and fewer think about how to really deal with it and the root causes of that debt. I hear a lot of 'Net chatter from people who simply want to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, demeaning alternative power sources as "greenie stuff that gave us California's power mess."
As far as I'm concerned, it's a shame but exploring space is something my kids will have to do.
Something tells me even your kids won't be doing it. It will be kids in Beijing that will be exploring space, because the West is resting on its laurels, too busy solidifying its economic and political empire and keeping the masses content and mollified to worry about little things like "exploration" and "pure science".
Ironically, much of the West's technological power today came as a result of the space race. I wonder if the same thing is about to happen in China. I wonder if another freedom movement will come with it - one that might succeed.
At best, I would call the development series "alpha". Beta implies that the kernel is ready for general testing prior to release, and there are few known showstopper bugs.
When 2.5 goes -rc, or Linus starts making prereleaserr noises, then go ahead and call it "beta". Until then, it's the type of thing you inflict on a computer you don't mind messing around with.
I'm legally blind without thick glasses. I may be legally blind *with* glasses. I'll never drive, because I'll fail the eye test. So, I kinda know where you're now coming from:)
Large monitors are good. I find that magnifiers don't feel 'natural' to look through, and software magnification that makes you scroll the screen around your work area is an added headache you don't need. Size, size, size.
I currently have a 20" (18" viewable) ViewSonic from about 9 years ago, and I'm getting an 18" (17" viewable) ViewSonic LCD this coming week. Flicker and too much brightness can do a real job on your eyes; blurriness will increase, your head will ache somewhat, the usual you can expect from overtaxing your eyes.
Crank the font size in your web browser, and get used to the overall look and placement of icons and menu items. You don't have to see everything perfectly if you know where things should be placed in relation to others.
Even with all the tricks, you'll never be completely comfortable with your monitor and desktop setup. Get used to looking closer a lot at times, and be sure to take breaks when you need it. Shut your eyes for a while.
A few days ago, I posted a quick personal review of OO 641C. I've been impressed by the software, and my main complaint was the speed of the program as a whole.
I can gladly say that 641D has introduced significant speed increases under Linux. Startup time fell by half; whereas I used to wait 20 seconds to get a workspace, I now wait 10 seconds or less. The interface in general has sped up. Things feel much snappier, far less laggy. Dialogs open faster, new windows open faster, the whole thing feels like the developers spent much of their time between releases on optimizations and speed increases. I'm already very impressed.
The one thing I used to dread about starting up OO was the speed. I don't think I'll have any such worries anymore, as it doesn't seem to bog down the system either anymore - or at least, not as much.
Actually, I think it's the Europeans who want things slightly larger:) When I print in A4 on 8.5x11 paper, the bottom margin is closer to the paper edge.
I've been running OO 641C since it was released. My machine is a PII-266 with 224 MB of RAM, so it tends to lag at times. However, SO 5.2 was never usable on this box. OO has replaced 5.1a.
I'll add my voice to those cheering the death of the SO 'desktop'. What a worthless feature, a waste of everyone's time. Now I get right to the good stuff... after about 20 seconds of startup.
MS document compatibility seems much improved. Strangely, I recently had more trouble with Word users opening a 95-formatted file as opposed to a 2000/XP-formatted.doc. I don't know if this is a good thing, a bad thing, and whether it's a reflection on the OO programmers or MS and its moving-target document formats.
Font detection seems *greatly* improved under X. OO appears to use X's own fonts as well as its internal fonts, meaning no more headaches and hacks to install TrueType fonts under SO. Printing hasn't been a problem at all, although North American users (guilty) may want to make sure the page size is set to "Letter" before printing; A4 seems to be the default.
Spell-checking is a bit loosy-goosy in detecting misspelled words, as it will sometimes stop at words with double quotes on one side or the other, but it works.
I still tend to warn people when I send them.docs in case things look screwy, but I hear fewer complaints than in the past.
I'm eagerly awaiting the next release of OO. I'm not sure if I'll buy Sun's StarOffice 6.0, since I'm not sure the value-add will be there, but I'm satisfied with the program the OO team has produced.
Y'know, the misadventures and mischief of the Cult of Scientology had dropped off my rader as other issues and problems grabbed my attention. After this smartass stunt, the cult is back in my sights for criticism and opposition.
Nice job, whichever Co$ lawyers were responsible for this mess - you've reminded me of why I dislike the cult so much in the first place. Would you like some salt in that wound?
This complex used to be the Cedars of Sinai hospital but was purchased by Hubbard and company back in the 1970's. It is where ASHO, AOLA, and the LA orgs are, as well as a good portion of OSA.
Lee, tell these folks all about the Office of Special Affairs. If ever there were a terrorist group operating on U.S. soil, OSA is it. Harassment, dirty tricks, stealing files from government offices, they've done it all.
And I touched on TMI in my response where, exactly?
But if I must... the main thing wrong with TMI is the fact that it partially melted down in the first place. The safety technology has improved, but there is no way one can ignore human error when designing such critical systems. Sooner or later, someone is going to screw up again, or an unforeseen circumstance (or a foreseen one that was brushed off) will bite someone in the ass. Insert cliche about ounce of prevention here.
Re:The Earth's temperature has ALWAYS fluctuated.
on
Larsen Ice Shelf Collapses
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Point being, the various carbon-burning byproducts we're tossing into the atmosphere, which accumulate on top of the natural carbon products that enter the air, aren't magically disappearing. The carbon monoxide, dioxide, sulfur products, and various acids that come from fossil-fuel burning would still be locked up in seams and resivoirs under layers of rock if we hadn't mined the stuff, processed it for fuel, and torched it to produce power. Face it; we are doing something to the environment with our fossil-fuel-based activities. We're not exactly sure what the long-term effects will be, or whether the biosphere as a whole can handle it, but sticking our heads in the sand won't take away what responsibility we hold in climate change, whether it be minimal or catastrophic. That shit doesn't just disappear, and the existing plantlife can't handle all of it. It certainly can't handle the non-CO2 byproducts. This doesn't even touch on the other artificial substances we throw away and dump at a fairly regular pace.
If there were more forests today than in the past, which Bjorn Lomborg argued, there would be nothing but forest from my old hometown of Tecumseh, ON, straight to Ottawa. At least in North America, we've forcibly converted much of the plant life from boreal forest to farmland, field, or concrete jungle.
First person to call me a Luddite or a primitivist, or a tree-hugging hippie, gets slapped. Just because we rely on technology does not give us license to ignore the effects our activities have on the world around us. To deny that our activities have an effect worth worrying about is to ignore the fact that we live as part of a fairly intricate, yet robust web of life. We don't exist separate from nature, we're a part of it, no matter how vehemently we try to deny it. Our cities and homes don't exist in special, non-nature bubbles. They're a part of the landscape, a part of the environment. What takes place in our dwellings will affect the land, water, and air around them. No escape.
Slashdot Mirror
A couple quotes from the article that made my jaw drop simply due to their mention:
OpenOffice can't run macros written in Microsoft's programming language, either. (On the bright side, you're therefore safe from Word and Excel macro viruses.)
I don't know if macro viruses are still floating around in the wild, but in a computer-illiterate, yet paranoid user culture, this may prove to be an important selling point. Time will tell if StarBasic can be used for similar abuses.
The article notes a few things that, if I understand correctly, OOo does better than MSO:
It's nice to have a proper Font menu (showing font names in their actual typefaces) at the top of the window, instead of on a toolbar that may not be open. It's also a pleasure to be able to open any kind of OpenOffice document (text, spreadsheet, presentation, drawing) from the File menu of any of its programs. [...] Both Word and OpenOffice Writer let you set up abbreviations that when typed expand into longer words or phrases. But only OpenOffice offers to complete frequently used long words automatically, which quickly becomes a huge timesaver.
If you listen to Bill's Legions, MSO is the all-singing, all-dancing crap of the world that can do everything you can think of and more. I would appreciate being corrected here if MSO does the above, and I'd be surprised if it didn't.
Fortunately, the open-source nature of OpenOffice.org holds tantalizing promise for improved versions. Anyone is permitted, even encouraged, to submit bug reports, wish lists of features and other feedback via the Web site. As a new droplet in the tidal wave of the open-source movement, you may even experience the thrill of watching your tiny input have an effect on the next version.
*jumps up and down like a moron on speed*
This is what keeps me coming back to OSS efforts. I may not be able to program worth a lick, but I can still directly contribute to the improvement of a program I use and interact with the programmers as if they're human beings, instead of distant gods on top of a mountain of C code somewhere. I think this aspect of the Mozilla project should have been screamed to the heavens even more than it was to the users, the idea that Joe User could make a solid, tangible contribution to making their computers easier and better, rather than waiting for God Gates to bestow His latest Blessings upon the unwashed masses. Maybe it's due to my anarchist leanings, but I think we're better when we work together and listen to the people affected by our decisions and our work, instead of assuming I, and I alone, know what's best for everyone else.
Give a person a taste of the power, freedom, and agency s/he can have as an individual among many, and that person will never want to give it up. It's a liberating feeling.
Agreed - this is the best way to do it on a multiuser-oriented operating system. I actually have a script in /etc/skel that allows the user to run the workstation install from a desktop icon. I'm not sure if any $HOME-specific settings are registered upon workstation install, so I'm a bit queasy about simply tossing an OpenOffice.org1.0 directory into /etc/skel. It's a bit of a kludge, and Ximian offers RPMs with a skeleton directory, but it works.
To my fellow OOo users running under GNOME, you may have encountered a problem where the program will often fail to start properly. This is not a crash. OOo is simply being purged by the GNOME session manager due to its relatively long startup time. I was a bit surprised to encounter this problem in 1.0, having thought it an OO bug. However, this article led me to search Issuezilla for a solution, which thankfully was determined.
There are a couple ways around the purge. The easiest one is to add "unset SESSION_MANAGER" to the soffice startup script. One file, all GNOME users happy. A somewhat more intrusive and wide-ranging solution is to add "exec $PATH_TO_GNOME-SESSION/gnome-session --purge-delay=0" to ~/.gnomerc. Supposedly, this will solve a similar problem with Opera, according to the bug comments.
(not to mention our own new-anarchist Slashdot :-) [...] In short, it is news by consensus.
Someone else pointed out that the correct term is "neo-anarchist", and second, it's not really anarchist. It's more of a dictatorship, quite frankly. The articles to be discussed are chosen by an unelected group of editors, and we just get to rant. "News by consensus" would imply that the editors decide collectively which stories will be posted, all stories were unanimously agreed upon, and tossing in the word "anarchist" implies that all participants have a say in which stories are posted, instead of the unchosen few. It sounds a bit harsh, but at 3 am, I can't think of a nicer way to explain it:)
A slightly better example might be Indymedia's features. The center-column stories are developed by individuals or groups, and they're posted and edited on a collective, consensus basis. Anyone may submit a feature to any IMC (generally, it's good to try to make a feature relevant to the local IMC you're submitting to, though this varies greatly), and anyone can get involved in the editing and decision process.
Admittedly, the consensus process breaks down for breaking stories, as someone occasionally takes initiative and posts a hot story in a features column, but editing and development continues collaboratively.
This is mostly based on my observations of and occasional participation in the "global" features collective; some locals have a similar style of features development, some rely heavily on dedicated volunteers to handle development. A few rely on one or two people, simply due to a lack of volunteers.
Newsmax, from what I gather, is like a "traditional" newsroom, only really right-wing, and Drudge is the man himself plugged in to everywhere and posting anything hot. It's his site, dammit, and he'll do what he wants:)
Hashing out new ways of using a powerful medium is fun!
Did you try switching to the Modern theme?
Or take a peek at some of the other available themes to find something you like?
It works beautifully, and Nautilus will run with an incorrect Mozilla version anyway; it just won't access Web pages, probably due to a version check while loading the Gecko library.
Upgrade away - she's a beaut.
As I type this, the party tracking page indicates that 1873 people are attending Mozilla release parties around the world.
I don't know what this says about the Mozilla community - that so many people are willing to party over a freaking browser release, that we're h4rdc0r3, d00d, or that we never get out.
Congrats to the team, it's time to crush Bill.
A couple things:
1) It's Mike Ruppert, not Vreeland. Delmart "Mike" Vreeland is either a former Navy officer with a thing for identify theft and credit card fraud, or a Navy intelligence officer with some scary info, depending who you ask on which day. Ruppert loved the guy at first, but some of his more erratic behaviour and dodging is making him a bit wary.
Ruppert is a former LA cop who was supposedly fired in 1978 while trying to expose CIA involvement in LA drug dealing activities. Journalist Gary Webb saw his career torn to shreds for reporting similar happenings a few years ago in the San Jose Mercury.
2) Corn and Ruppert have an ongoing, somewhat nasty rivalry. The article you link elicited this response from Ruppert.
I wonder if MS pulled the same stunt with the IRS.
Or is this how the SEC figured out something smelled about MS' accounting?
OpenOffice 1.0 is available through Red Carpet.
Nope. That's false. You're thinking about trademarks. Patents can be as selectively enforced as the owner wants.
OK, that makes some sense, though for some reason I still think patents have to be defended by the holder, lest their legitimacy be lost.
Maybe the defenses only need to be made if the holder intends to license the patent exclusively, or not at all.
More minds needed.
I have this shirt in my closet (well, it's in my laundry basket right now, but you get the idea) that I'm rather happy to have. I got it from ThinkGeek a couple years ago. It takes a rather cute shot at the USPTO, with a certain someone's signature emblazoned under the text.
"All good things...", I suppose, though I still can't get the "skunky beer" look off my face right now. I hate when reality sticks its nose into my idealism.
I wouldn't be doing unless I was *convinced* this was the only way to do things in the short term, and that generic GPL use would be granted.
First thing: whenever I see someone take an action they would normally be stringently against due to "short term" considerations, alarms go off in my head. In my 22 short years, I've noticed that short-term gains made against principles can cause long-term problems. You're almost certainly far wiser than me about how the "real world" works, but something about the whole thing just seems... off, I dunno.
Second thing, potentially exposing my lack of understanding about certain patent-related issues: It's my understanding that if a patent is not defended by the holder, the protection may be ruled unenforceable later. This is partly the reason for many of the stupid patent fights, and the raison d'etre of several companies that do nothing but purchase and "offensively defend" patents. I imagine some legal beagle over at RH came up with a great answer for this, but would allowing distribution of code implementing the patents under the GPL potentially allow certain competitors to later challenge the validity of the patent protection by arguing that early free distribution of said code indicates a lack of concern about patent protection? I have some trouble explaining precisely what I mean, but could there be a potential conflict between the aspects of the GPL meant to ensure unfettered, open distribution of code and the patent system's requirement that patents be defended if the holder intends to control use of the patented technology or process?
I think the answer is "no", as I don't recall hearing any limits on how a patented technology can be licensed, and I think my above concerns are unwarranted due to the intent behind the GPL; it wouldn't be as if the patent-implementing code would be released as closed-source without legal raising hell over other implementations of the code.
Or is this exactly the intent; patent code, license it under the GPL, and go after any patent implementations that aren't derived from or released as GPL code?
Lots of meandering questions and thoughts, so some clarity from a knowledgable person would be wonderful.
Absolutely, considering that the US devised nukes during WWII and the Germans did not. Not that it matters.
Nuclear fission was discovered by a German scientist, Lise Meitner. Once word of the discovery got out, Einstein (German) wrote a letter to FDR warning of the possibility of Nazi Germany getting the bomb. The Manhattan Project was a crash program to make sure the Germans didn't get there first.
Still, the knowledge wasn't exactly "stolen".
The reason most western governments aren't massively funding space exploration is because they are (by and large) run by a democracy that is forced to listen to the people
Not even "by and large"; western governments are run by people supposedly chosen to represent the millions, but in reality represent only themselves, basing their decisions to a great, great extent on what will help them maintain their exalted, feted position when the next election rolls around. The population thinks the representatives are voting based on what "the people" want. It's a comfortable illusion, and an ultimately dangerous one.
right now, the attitude of the people is screw space, we have bigger problems, like 3rd world debt, growing the economy and reducing our dependance on oil.
Except I don't think a lot of people in the U.S. pay much mind to third world debt, and fewer think about how to really deal with it and the root causes of that debt. I hear a lot of 'Net chatter from people who simply want to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, demeaning alternative power sources as "greenie stuff that gave us California's power mess."
As far as I'm concerned, it's a shame but exploring space is something my kids will have to do.
Something tells me even your kids won't be doing it. It will be kids in Beijing that will be exploring space, because the West is resting on its laurels, too busy solidifying its economic and political empire and keeping the masses content and mollified to worry about little things like "exploration" and "pure science".
Ironically, much of the West's technological power today came as a result of the space race. I wonder if the same thing is about to happen in China. I wonder if another freedom movement will come with it - one that might succeed.
At best, I would call the development series "alpha". Beta implies that the kernel is ready for general testing prior to release, and there are few known showstopper bugs.
When 2.5 goes -rc, or Linus starts making prereleaserr noises, then go ahead and call it "beta". Until then, it's the type of thing you inflict on a computer you don't mind messing around with.
I'm legally blind without thick glasses. I may be legally blind *with* glasses. I'll never drive, because I'll fail the eye test. So, I kinda know where you're now coming from:)
Large monitors are good. I find that magnifiers don't feel 'natural' to look through, and software magnification that makes you scroll the screen around your work area is an added headache you don't need. Size, size, size.
I currently have a 20" (18" viewable) ViewSonic from about 9 years ago, and I'm getting an 18" (17" viewable) ViewSonic LCD this coming week. Flicker and too much brightness can do a real job on your eyes; blurriness will increase, your head will ache somewhat, the usual you can expect from overtaxing your eyes.
Crank the font size in your web browser, and get used to the overall look and placement of icons and menu items. You don't have to see everything perfectly if you know where things should be placed in relation to others.
Even with all the tricks, you'll never be completely comfortable with your monitor and desktop setup. Get used to looking closer a lot at times, and be sure to take breaks when you need it. Shut your eyes for a while.
This is all general stuff, but I hope it helps.
A few days ago, I posted a quick personal review of OO 641C. I've been impressed by the software, and my main complaint was the speed of the program as a whole.
I can gladly say that 641D has introduced significant speed increases under Linux. Startup time fell by half; whereas I used to wait 20 seconds to get a workspace, I now wait 10 seconds or less. The interface in general has sped up. Things feel much snappier, far less laggy. Dialogs open faster, new windows open faster, the whole thing feels like the developers spent much of their time between releases on optimizations and speed increases. I'm already very impressed.
The one thing I used to dread about starting up OO was the speed. I don't think I'll have any such worries anymore, as it doesn't seem to bog down the system either anymore - or at least, not as much.
I'm a happy user.
Actually, I think it's the Europeans who want things slightly larger:) When I print in A4 on 8.5x11 paper, the bottom margin is closer to the paper edge.
I've been running OO 641C since it was released. My machine is a PII-266 with 224 MB of RAM, so it tends to lag at times. However, SO 5.2 was never usable on this box. OO has replaced 5.1a.
.doc. I don't know if this is a good thing, a bad thing, and whether it's a reflection on the OO programmers or MS and its moving-target document formats.
.docs in case things look screwy, but I hear fewer complaints than in the past.
I'll add my voice to those cheering the death of the SO 'desktop'. What a worthless feature, a waste of everyone's time. Now I get right to the good stuff... after about 20 seconds of startup.
MS document compatibility seems much improved. Strangely, I recently had more trouble with Word users opening a 95-formatted file as opposed to a 2000/XP-formatted
Font detection seems *greatly* improved under X. OO appears to use X's own fonts as well as its internal fonts, meaning no more headaches and hacks to install TrueType fonts under SO. Printing hasn't been a problem at all, although North American users (guilty) may want to make sure the page size is set to "Letter" before printing; A4 seems to be the default.
Spell-checking is a bit loosy-goosy in detecting misspelled words, as it will sometimes stop at words with double quotes on one side or the other, but it works.
I still tend to warn people when I send them
I'm eagerly awaiting the next release of OO. I'm not sure if I'll buy Sun's StarOffice 6.0, since I'm not sure the value-add will be there, but I'm satisfied with the program the OO team has produced.
Y'know, the misadventures and mischief of the Cult of Scientology had dropped off my rader as other issues and problems grabbed my attention. After this smartass stunt, the cult is back in my sights for criticism and opposition.
Nice job, whichever Co$ lawyers were responsible for this mess - you've reminded me of why I dislike the cult so much in the first place. Would you like some salt in that wound?
Talk about shooting yourself in the foot
Another victory in $cientology's great campaign against wogs, Fair Game, and squirrels, Operation Foot Bullet.
Chris Owen exposes all.
This complex used to be the Cedars of Sinai hospital but was purchased by Hubbard and company back in the 1970's. It is where ASHO, AOLA, and the LA orgs are, as well as a good portion of OSA.
Lee, tell these folks all about the Office of Special Affairs. If ever there were a terrorist group operating on U.S. soil, OSA is it. Harassment, dirty tricks, stealing files from government offices, they've done it all.
So what exactly is the problem with 3mile island?
And I touched on TMI in my response where, exactly?
But if I must... the main thing wrong with TMI is the fact that it partially melted down in the first place. The safety technology has improved, but there is no way one can ignore human error when designing such critical systems. Sooner or later, someone is going to screw up again, or an unforeseen circumstance (or a foreseen one that was brushed off) will bite someone in the ass. Insert cliche about ounce of prevention here.
Point being, the various carbon-burning byproducts we're tossing into the atmosphere, which accumulate on top of the natural carbon products that enter the air, aren't magically disappearing. The carbon monoxide, dioxide, sulfur products, and various acids that come from fossil-fuel burning would still be locked up in seams and resivoirs under layers of rock if we hadn't mined the stuff, processed it for fuel, and torched it to produce power. Face it; we are doing something to the environment with our fossil-fuel-based activities. We're not exactly sure what the long-term effects will be, or whether the biosphere as a whole can handle it, but sticking our heads in the sand won't take away what responsibility we hold in climate change, whether it be minimal or catastrophic. That shit doesn't just disappear, and the existing plantlife can't handle all of it. It certainly can't handle the non-CO2 byproducts. This doesn't even touch on the other artificial substances we throw away and dump at a fairly regular pace.
If there were more forests today than in the past, which Bjorn Lomborg argued, there would be nothing but forest from my old hometown of Tecumseh, ON, straight to Ottawa. At least in North America, we've forcibly converted much of the plant life from boreal forest to farmland, field, or concrete jungle.
First person to call me a Luddite or a primitivist, or a tree-hugging hippie, gets slapped. Just because we rely on technology does not give us license to ignore the effects our activities have on the world around us. To deny that our activities have an effect worth worrying about is to ignore the fact that we live as part of a fairly intricate, yet robust web of life. We don't exist separate from nature, we're a part of it, no matter how vehemently we try to deny it. Our cities and homes don't exist in special, non-nature bubbles. They're a part of the landscape, a part of the environment. What takes place in our dwellings will affect the land, water, and air around them. No escape.