Re:Not a cop-out, just a fact
on
The CVS Cop-Out
·
· Score: 1
Good point. Thank you for posting. That is good food for thought.
Re:Oh .. I get it.
on
The CVS Cop-Out
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I agree with the "really want to" in general. However, what about the situation that someone develops something they like because they want to and just wish to put it out in case someone else 'might' find it interesting or useful. Programs, code snippets, recipes, home brew vodka filtrations, or whatever. I am not in the camp that once something is released that obligates the creator to shepherd all people who wish to use it. Do I encourage developers/shares to help their audience in whatever way they consider reasonable? Yes, I do. But, it isn't a requirement. It's something extra that fits into the same general category as the realising of the item in the first place. A small willingness to help. In another context: if the creator offers to install the software for a user then that is great. However, again, it isn't a requirement just because they released it. Neither is a support phone number, support email, or support forum.
Here is something interesting I thought about as I was typing this. I rarely see this issue occur with items released into the public domain. Only "open source" style licenses. Why is that? Have I just not seen it or is there something about the concept of a license that puts some users into the concept of "you owe me". Comments anyone?
Re:Not a cop-out, just a fact
on
The CVS Cop-Out
·
· Score: 1
As you seem to be in agreement with the writer of the article may I ask you a question? Oops, I guess I just did. Well I am going to ask you another one:P. I suspect part of the issue would be the way the CVS response was phrased. Would a better response about the bug have been this? "Yes, that is true with the current release. However, we have already fixed that in CVS and are working to make that into the next stable branch." I suspect from the developers point of view they are getting tired of having some flaw pointed out that they have already dealt with. From the users point of view it is as you put it. They don't wish to run a declared non stable version just to get rid of the bug they are experiencing. This isn't meant to address how long until the new version goes stable. That is a whole different question with its own argument, heh.
Perhaps you post is flame bait. However, take this more as something interesting. It only took about 20 seconds of googeling(sp?) to locate it. I suspect more are locatable. -----
November 2000 -- National Cancer Institute, Panama City. In a series of accidents, therapy planning software created by Multidata Systems International, a U.S. firm, miscalculates the proper dosage of radiation for patients undergoing radiation therapy.
Multidata's software allows a radiation therapist to draw on a computer screen the placement of metal shields called "blocks" designed to protect healthy tissue from the radiation. But the software will only allow technicians to use four shielding blocks, and the Panamanian doctors wish to use five.
The doctors discover that they can trick the software by drawing all five blocks as a single large block with a hole in the middle. What the doctors don't realize is that the Multidata software gives different answers in this configuration depending on how the hole is drawn: draw it in one direction and the correct dose is calculated, draw in another direction and the software recommends twice the necessary exposure.
At least eight patients die, while another 20 receive overdoses likely to cause significant health problems. The physicians, who were legally required to double-check the computer's calculations by hand, are indicted for murder.
rotfl. Wow dude. What can I say? You really have issues. Anyway, now that I have had a good chuckle, I shall head back to my 'little world' or 'word' as you so put it. I would try to reason with you more, however that would require the use of logic which you seem to eschew. When you cool down, reread what I had to say. I believe you will find it helpful when working with others in the future and reasonable discourse is required.
P.S. Avoid computer science, linquistics, formal debate, journalism, or any engineering field until that time. You will be much happier and so will those who have to work with you.
Logic does not end when leaving the classroom. Let me make this clear to you.
Logic is the study of criteria for the evaluation of arguments. Common sense is beliefs or propositions that in the presenters opinion they consider would in most people's experience be prudent and of sound judgment.
A judgment is a balanced weighing up of evidence preparatory to making a decision.
The first two conditions of a judgement are
1) There must be corroborating evidence for the statement.
2) There must be no true contradicting statements. Truth [in this situation] refers to to logical validity. Logical means: of, relating to, in accordance with, or of the nature of logic.
As you can see, common sense runs along the same epistemological lines as logic. Logic is a core foundation of common sense. Without a form of logic, there is no common sense.
Both the original statement When Microsoft decides that it's time for you to buy the latest version of their OS, you have NO FUCKING CHOICE and the follow up example Slashdotters are nerds are declarative statements without conditional qualifiers. That means they are to be true regardless of condition. Hence, universally true. As you can see above, it only takes a single true contradiction to show show it has no logical validity and thus defies common sense. Instead of the statement about the slashdotters you may have well as said "All stars are yellow". It only takes one single example to disprove this statement. A better choice for the original statement would have been to add a qualifier such as 'if they wish to stay current with security practices as to maintain a practical level of safety on dangerous networks such as the Internet.' While that would not be perfect, it is much harder to disprove than a universal statement.
If it still isn't clear then consider this statement 'All slashdotters are female.' It only takes one guy to disprove this as you are setting some definite slashdotters_are_female variable. Oh, and as for your statement It's supposed to be mutually understood what my actual idea is. That is a bunch of bullshit. One of the points of communication is convey your ideas and thought to another. I should not be responsible for doing your communication for you. If it is supposed to be mutually understood then you should do your part of the 'mutual' action and make sure it is understood by providing appropriate context. It isn't my responsibility to do your work for you just so I can understand what the fsck you are talking about. People aren't mind readers. If you cannot be bothered to say or type what you mean then don't be a whining child when people don't understand what you are thinking or trying to convey. sigh, I suppose in Internet parlance this is the point I would say STFU. Of course that relies on a general understanding of that those letters mean. If you don't get it, thats ok. I won't whine or cry about it. I will be happy to spell it out for you.
Oh and forgive the posting of this as code and the occasional messed up space. Slashdot kept trowing up that stupid lamness/postercomment compression filter crap. Funny thing is, if I previewed what I posted then tried to submit it would reject it. If I just went back in my browser and submitted directly it worked. Wierd....
Sure no problem. Congrats on finding the solution intable form. I would just like to admit that I used to be a big believer in table based layouts. So I understand where anyone who still likes them is coming from. I have been doing things on the web since back when it was experimental. You know, the dark ages before search engines and netscape.:) Here is how to do this via CSS. I am including two examples which are actually the same thing. The first is organized similar to your example to you can compare. The second is a little more spaced out so you can get a better example as to what is going on. This was pulled, with permission, from production code. The actual production code has additional things like headers and footers.
Open this in a reasonably compliant browser. For example FireFox or Opera. For clarity, I have pulled out the things to get ie to conform closer to the W3 specs. Here is the html...
As you can see, both the table and css style are close in size, though I believe the css one may be a tad shorter. I havn't counted bytes. Both of these are
>If you want the layout to do something "extra" (eg. "make the center column 400px wide, but allow it to grow if the cell contains a wide image, pushing the right column") it will (probably) be impossible using divs, but trivial using tables.
Nope, not impossible at all. In fact that is exactly what I have been doing for the latest html I have been working on. It has been converted from a table based layout. The html is less thgan 50% the size and much more flexable. Now, try this one in tables... Make a page that displays a center flexible column flanked by two static sized (in width only) columns, however in the html arrange it as so the content is picked up more readily by search engines. Good luck in your attempt. Doing it in CSS wasn't bad at all.
>>...is a fool who doesn't deserve to be involved in web development. >> Anyone who doesn't care about web standards might as well go back to 1998-99 and try to keep riding the bubble.
>Try giving your speech to somebody who is paying you for your time, THEN get back to us.
I am not the original poster, however, I will take you up on that here and now. I have said not only that but harsher things to my current employer along with my reasons why I stated it. The result? I am currently paid full time for the web work and ever since and nothing goes out without without complying to the standards. Issues with the web site have dropped considerably from both the developers' and customers' perspectives. The interesting thing about your post is that you seem to imply that one couldn't vocally take such a position and be paid. Sorry bud, your are flat wrong.
An associate of mine had the same response from his parents. His response? "You didn't pay for a degree in Microsoft Windows, so why the f*ck do you think that I know anything about it?" It appeared to get the point across.
Primarily because a large number of adds are flash advertisements. Not all, but a significant number to be easily considered a part of the "in general" grouping. This is where the apparent contradiction comes in. With this second AC post it becomes clear what you were intending. Nothing wrong with your intent. It was just the execution of it. Also, make note, for anyone who does run into a lot of flash advertisements, your specific cases description becomes yet another set of general descriptions. It wasn't quite specific enough. This also contributed to the confusion.
This response is to neither agree or disagree with your original statement. It is only to help you understand what went wrong from someone else's perspective. Hopefully this will enable you to deliver your next message with even more clarity and "punch" next time. Enough practice and I think you will be able to do quite well.:)
lol. Rather funny. I don't need to read the paper to know that. I was there. I have direct knowledge and experiance of their limitations. Yet, I and many others used them successfully. There is a large difference between 'rank page relevance sucked' and 'impossible to get any usable results'. Google is by far easier to use, but that does not translate to 'all others were unusable'.
2> While it wasn't your fault that ext2 was terrible... 3> You're blaming me again...
Doesn't look like it to me. It appears you are to ready to take offence and not ready enough to pay attention to what you are reading.
1> Way back in the stone age.... sometime in 1997, maybe? Maybe 1998. 3> There WERE NO FSCKING DOCS back then;
I beg to differ. I have been using Linux since 1992. Docs have always been available. 3> finding Linux info was *hard*. I disagree again. FAQs, HowTos, UseNet,ReadMes, Web Pages, Man Pages. About the hardest thing to find was a published book, however even those were available.
3> There was no Google. Maybe you're too young to remember the early internet... By this statement it would appear that you are as well. Google is not the only search engine. Webcrawler, Excite, AltaVista, those have existed before Google. The net did not spring to existance at the creation of Google. Nor did the concept of search engines. In the earliest days of Linux, the web was still young and this Linux depended on other methods in addition to (or in spite of) search engines. You example seems to imply that you are only tried a single method. If I did that for Microsoft information I would never find anything either.
The problem is that there isn't a clear difference on your irritation at a pure ext2 proplblem and your failure to take additional measures outside of the scope of ext2. Thus, you will get a mixed response. Interestingly enough, if your response here is something to judge by, you are just as obnoxious as overbearing elitists.
To hopefuly make it clear to you how this is let us reverse the situation. Imagine if I commented, at the time, that Fat32 for Windows 98 was fragile becuase it scrambled things during a powerfailure. I can fully expect that I should receive both a discussion on both the Fat32 frailities and how to work around them. As it turns out, this information, and its brethren for Fat16, has been known and available for many years. During the discussion if it turns out that I failed to research that available information before setting up a server, then correctly, I have made a mistake and I should expect someone to note that. If in my discussions it is apparent that I am angry with thye situation, but have not made it clear that I can seperate my anger between the file system implementation failures and my own failure to do due dilligance, than I cannot be upset if I receive some responses that adress either issue without the other.
The issue or irritating people who appear to ignore problems and blame the user is prevalent in every area, it is not Linux specific. Likewise, the issue of people who wish to shift any hint of any related mistakes on their part to the design of the product is just as prolific. It appears that you two met. That isn't fun for anybody.
The morale of the sory is: If there is a problem with a product you should be free to discuss those short commings. If you have exacerbated the problem with your own actions or inactions then others should also be free to discuss your short commings. The FaberTec 1 TB hardrive might be flakey, but that doesn't excuse me for putting it right next to a large magnet.
I never did until just about a week ago. I was requested, by my employer, to locate a software solution. Both open source and proprietary were to be considered. For the non open source, I checked all of the major add links that google coughed up on my keyword search. It was actually quicker than digging through the redundant links in the search. Other than that? Never. I always find what I am looking for without those links.
First the violence arrives as I die yet again at the end of level. I get so mad I smash my console. Then the drugs as I consume copious amounts of alcohol to forget that I just smashed my gaming system. I buy a replacement and the vicious cycle starts all over again. "Hello, my name is B|nky and I am an addict.":(
Re:Same material as Singh's previous "The Code Boo
on
The Science of Secrecy
·
· Score: 1
And if you haven't ready either or seen the series, which would be suggested?
I agree. I use my home system for development as well as gaming when I want a break. I find that the needs of my work system (compilation, servers, rendering, network stuff, etc) tend to overlap with a good gaming system. Delays caused by multiple resource hungry applications really tend to add up at the end of the day. Typically when I upgrade I end up with both a development and a gaming system. I push the memory a little more for the development and I push the video card a little more for the gameing. With respect to the processor, it is the same for both*. There also seems to be a good bit of overlap with pc based server systems.
*Though dual processors is more suitable for development, it does help a little with keeping a game on one cpu the other junk on the remaining cpu.
Just thought I would reply to this as I currently have both a 2200 and Doom3. It is indeed solid while playing. No crashes, smooth play, etc. Very enjoyable. I can even crank everything up and it still stays solid. Though, at that point, I can go get a cup of coffee between each frame. The grandparent post is probably correct in its use of "solid". What you are talking about is smooth. With that, you are correct. At high settings, the 2200 (and a medium graphics card) is as smooth as a heart monitor showing flat-line and about as responsive.:P
This is an an excellent reason to develop with the Model-View-Controller paradigm. You can develop the UI to be as complete as you want. It becomes reasonable to turn the prototype into the final product. However, that doesn't mean you can release it right away since the interface is only the view. You still have to develop the other two parts of the architecture. It is good for the customer because you can say yes to their request. It is also good for you since this separation has kept you from accidentally polluting the the rest of the code with the UI prototype/non-prototype. Also you can use separate languages for each part of the MVC architecture. Use a language that suits itself to the UI and then change to something else that better fits the controller and likewise the model.
I see... so apparently the Internet didn't exist much before 1995? I guess Microsoft invented it when they put a "The Internet" button on the desktop in Windows 95. Wow, the CIA/NSA/FBI/MIB/Illuminati are really getting good in mind control. I could have sworn I was on it constantly before that, along with a whole slew of other researchers, chatters, and gamers. Why don't they just brainwash me into thinking that: a) the Internet only exists in the form of the web, b) I go on the web to see the advertisements and it is everything else I want to block?:P
Actually yes, I would be interested in the references if that wouldn't be too much trouble. I can't say I have heard too much about non-adaptive evolution in the mainstream.
Slashdot Mirror
Good point. Thank you for posting. That is good food for thought.
I agree with the "really want to" in general. However, what about the situation that someone develops something they like because they want to and just wish to put it out in case someone else 'might' find it interesting or useful. Programs, code snippets, recipes, home brew vodka filtrations, or whatever. I am not in the camp that once something is released that obligates the creator to shepherd all people who wish to use it. Do I encourage developers/shares to help their audience in whatever way they consider reasonable? Yes, I do. But, it isn't a requirement. It's something extra that fits into the same general category as the realising of the item in the first place. A small willingness to help. In another context: if the creator offers to install the software for a user then that is great. However, again, it isn't a requirement just because they released it. Neither is a support phone number, support email, or support forum.
Here is something interesting I thought about as I was typing this. I rarely see this issue occur with items released into the public domain. Only "open source" style licenses. Why is that? Have I just not seen it or is there something about the concept of a license that puts some users into the concept of "you owe me". Comments anyone?
As you seem to be in agreement with the writer of the article may I ask you a question? Oops, I guess I just did. Well I am going to ask you another one :P. I suspect part of the issue would be the way the CVS response was phrased. Would a better response about the bug have been this? "Yes, that is true with the current release. However, we have already fixed that in CVS and are working to make that into the next stable branch." I suspect from the developers point of view they are getting tired of having some flaw pointed out that they have already dealt with. From the users point of view it is as you put it. They don't wish to run a declared non stable version just to get rid of the bug they are experiencing. This isn't meant to address how long until the new version goes stable. That is a whole different question with its own argument, heh.
Perhaps you post is flame bait. However, take this more as something interesting. It only took about 20 seconds of googeling(sp?) to locate it. I suspect more are locatable.
-----
November 2000 -- National Cancer Institute, Panama City. In a series of accidents, therapy planning software created by Multidata Systems International, a U.S. firm, miscalculates the proper dosage of radiation for patients undergoing radiation therapy.
Multidata's software allows a radiation therapist to draw on a computer screen the placement of metal shields called "blocks" designed to protect healthy tissue from the radiation. But the software will only allow technicians to use four shielding blocks, and the Panamanian doctors wish to use five.
The doctors discover that they can trick the software by drawing all five blocks as a single large block with a hole in the middle. What the doctors don't realize is that the Multidata software gives different answers in this configuration depending on how the hole is drawn: draw it in one direction and the correct dose is calculated, draw in another direction and the software recommends twice the necessary exposure.
At least eight patients die, while another 20 receive overdoses likely to cause significant health problems. The physicians, who were legally required to double-check the computer's calculations by hand, are indicted for murder.
rotfl. Wow dude. What can I say? You really have issues. Anyway, now that I have had a good chuckle, I shall head back to my 'little world' or 'word' as you so put it. I would try to reason with you more, however that would require the use of logic which you seem to eschew. When you cool down, reread what I had to say. I believe you will find it helpful when working with others in the future and reasonable discourse is required.
P.S. Avoid computer science, linquistics, formal debate, journalism, or any engineering field until that time. You will be much happier and so will those who have to work with you.
Logic is the study of criteria for the evaluation of arguments.
Common sense is beliefs or propositions that in the presenters opinion they consider would in most people's experience be prudent and of sound judgment.
A judgment is a balanced weighing up of evidence preparatory to making a decision.
The first two conditions of a judgement are
1) There must be corroborating evidence for the statement.
2) There must be no true contradicting statements.
Truth [in this situation] refers to to logical validity.
Logical means: of, relating to, in accordance with, or of the nature of logic.
As you can see, common sense runs along the same epistemological lines as logic. Logic is a core foundation of common sense. Without a form of logic, there is no common sense.
Both the original statement When Microsoft decides that it's time for you to buy the latest version of their OS, you have NO FUCKING CHOICE and the follow up example Slashdotters are nerds are declarative statements without conditional qualifiers. That means they are to be true regardless of condition. Hence, universally true. As you can see above, it only takes a single true contradiction to show show it has no logical validity and thus defies common sense. Instead of the statement about the slashdotters you may have well as said "All stars are yellow". It only takes one single example to disprove this statement. A better choice for the original statement would have been to add a qualifier such as 'if they wish to stay current with security practices as to maintain a practical level of safety on dangerous networks such as the Internet.' While that would not be perfect, it is much harder to disprove than a universal statement.
If it still isn't clear then consider this statement 'All slashdotters are female.' It only takes one guy to disprove this as you are setting some definite slashdotters_are_female variable. Oh, and as for your statement It's supposed to be mutually understood what my actual idea is. That is a bunch of bullshit. One of the points of communication is convey your ideas and thought to another. I should not be responsible for doing your communication for you. If it is supposed to be mutually understood then you should do your part of the 'mutual' action and make sure it is understood by providing appropriate context. It isn't my responsibility to do your work for you just so I can understand what the fsck you are talking about. People aren't mind readers. If you cannot be bothered to say or type what you mean then don't be a whining child when people don't understand what you are thinking or trying to convey. sigh, I suppose in Internet parlance this is the point I would say STFU. Of course that relies on a general understanding of that those letters mean. If you don't get it, thats ok. I won't whine or cry about it. I will be happy to spell it out for you.
Oh and forgive the posting of this as code and the occasional messed up space. Slashdot kept trowing up that stupid lamness/postercomment compression filter crap. Funny thing is, if I previewed what I posted then tried to submit it would reject it. If I just went back in my browser and submitted directly it worked. Wierd....
Sure no problem. Congrats on finding the solution intable form. I would just like to admit that I used to be a big believer in table based layouts. So I understand where anyone who still likes them is coming from. I have been doing things on the web since back when it was experimental. You know, the dark ages before search engines and netscape. :) Here is how to do this via CSS. I am including two examples which are actually the same thing. The first is organized similar to your example to you can compare. The second is a little more spaced out so you can get a better example as to what is going on. This was pulled, with permission, from production code. The actual production code has additional things like headers and footers.
/><title>Test</title><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="style.css" /></head>
/> />
Open this in a reasonably compliant browser. For example FireFox or Opera. For clarity, I have pulled out the things to get ie to conform closer to the W3 specs. Here is the html...
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd ">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" lang="en" xml:lang="en">
<head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
<body id="some-site-com">
<div id="container">
<div id="section1_wrapper">
<div id="section1">Section 1</div>
</div>
<div id="section2">Section 2</div>
<div id="section3">Section 3</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>
Here it is in a little more readable form...
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd ">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" lang="en" xml:lang="en">
<head>
<title>
Test
</title>
<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="style.css"
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
</head>
<body id="some-site-com">
<div id="container">
<div id="section1_wrapper">
<div id="section1">
Section 1
</div>
</div>
<div id="section2">
Section 2
</div>
<div id="section3">
Section 3
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>
Save either one of those into an html file. Then save the following into a file called style.css
#section1_wrapper {
float: left;
width: 100%;
}
#section1 {
margin: 0 100px 0 100px;
}
#section2, #section3 {
margin-left: -100%;
width: 100px;
}
#section2 {
float: left;
}
#section3 {
float: right;
}
As you can see, both the table and css style are close in size, though I believe the css one may be a tad shorter. I havn't counted bytes. Both of these are
>If you want the layout to do something "extra" (eg. "make the center column 400px wide, but allow it to grow if the cell contains a wide image, pushing the right column") it will (probably) be impossible using divs, but trivial using tables.
Nope, not impossible at all. In fact that is exactly what I have been doing for the latest html I have been working on. It has been converted from a table based layout. The html is less thgan 50% the size and much more flexable. Now, try this one in tables... Make a page that displays a center flexible column flanked by two static sized (in width only) columns, however in the html arrange it as so the content is picked up more readily by search engines. Good luck in your attempt. Doing it in CSS wasn't bad at all.
>> ...is a fool who doesn't deserve to be involved in web development.
>> Anyone who doesn't care about web standards might as well go back to 1998-99 and try to keep riding the bubble.
>Try giving your speech to somebody who is paying you for your time, THEN get back to us.
I am not the original poster, however, I will take you up on that here and now. I have said not only that but harsher things to my current employer along with my reasons why I stated it. The result? I am currently paid full time for the web work and ever since and nothing goes out without without complying to the standards. Issues with the web site have dropped considerably from both the developers' and customers' perspectives. The interesting thing about your post is that you seem to imply that one couldn't vocally take such a position and be paid. Sorry bud, your are flat wrong.
Besides my other post, my favorite response would be "I'm glad I didn't study to be a gynocologist/proctologist."
An associate of mine had the same response from his parents. His response? "You didn't pay for a degree in Microsoft Windows, so why the f*ck do you think that I know anything about it?" It appeared to get the point across.
Primarily because a large number of adds are flash advertisements. Not all, but a significant number to be easily considered a part of the "in general" grouping. This is where the apparent contradiction comes in. With this second AC post it becomes clear what you were intending. Nothing wrong with your intent. It was just the execution of it. Also, make note, for anyone who does run into a lot of flash advertisements, your specific cases description becomes yet another set of general descriptions. It wasn't quite specific enough. This also contributed to the confusion.
:)
This response is to neither agree or disagree with your original statement. It is only to help you understand what went wrong from someone else's perspective. Hopefully this will enable you to deliver your next message with even more clarity and "punch" next time. Enough practice and I think you will be able to do quite well.
lol. Rather funny. I don't need to read the paper to know that. I was there. I have direct knowledge and experiance of their limitations. Yet, I and many others used them successfully. There is a large difference between 'rank page relevance sucked' and 'impossible to get any usable results'. Google is by far easier to use, but that does not translate to 'all others were unusable'.
2> While it wasn't your fault that ext2 was terrible...
3> You're blaming me again...
Doesn't look like it to me. It appears you are to ready to take offence and not ready enough to pay attention to what you are reading.
1> Way back in the stone age.... sometime in 1997, maybe? Maybe 1998.
3> There WERE NO FSCKING DOCS back then;
I beg to differ. I have been using Linux since 1992. Docs have always been available.
3> finding Linux info was *hard*.
I disagree again. FAQs, HowTos, UseNet,ReadMes, Web Pages, Man Pages. About the hardest thing to find was a published book, however even those were available.
3> There was no Google. Maybe you're too young to remember the early internet...
By this statement it would appear that you are as well. Google is not the only search engine. Webcrawler, Excite, AltaVista, those have existed before Google. The net did not spring to existance at the creation of Google. Nor did the concept of search engines. In the earliest days of Linux, the web was still young and this Linux depended on other methods in addition to (or in spite of) search engines. You example seems to imply that you are only tried a single method. If I did that for Microsoft information I would never find anything either.
The problem is that there isn't a clear difference on your irritation at a pure ext2 proplblem and your failure to take additional measures outside of the scope of ext2. Thus, you will get a mixed response. Interestingly enough, if your response here is something to judge by, you are just as obnoxious as overbearing elitists.
To hopefuly make it clear to you how this is let us reverse the situation. Imagine if I commented, at the time, that Fat32 for Windows 98 was fragile becuase it scrambled things during a powerfailure. I can fully expect that I should receive both a discussion on both the Fat32 frailities and how to work around them. As it turns out, this information, and its brethren for Fat16, has been known and available for many years. During the discussion if it turns out that I failed to research that available information before setting up a server, then correctly, I have made a mistake and I should expect someone to note that. If in my discussions it is apparent that I am angry with thye situation, but have not made it clear that I can seperate my anger between the file system implementation failures and my own failure to do due dilligance, than I cannot be upset if I receive some responses that adress either issue without the other.
The issue or irritating people who appear to ignore problems and blame the user is prevalent in every area, it is not Linux specific. Likewise, the issue of people who wish to shift any hint of any related mistakes on their part to the design of the product is just as prolific. It appears that you two met. That isn't fun for anybody.
The morale of the sory is: If there is a problem with a product you should be free to discuss those short commings. If you have exacerbated the problem with your own actions or inactions then others should also be free to discuss your short commings. The FaberTec 1 TB hardrive might be flakey, but that doesn't excuse me for putting it right next to a large magnet.
I never did until just about a week ago. I was requested, by my employer, to locate a software solution. Both open source and proprietary were to be considered. For the non open source, I checked all of the major add links that google coughed up on my keyword search. It was actually quicker than digging through the redundant links in the search. Other than that? Never. I always find what I am looking for without those links.
First the violence arrives as I die yet again at the end of level. I get so mad I smash my console. Then the drugs as I consume copious amounts of alcohol to forget that I just smashed my gaming system. I buy a replacement and the vicious cycle starts all over again. "Hello, my name is B|nky and I am an addict." :(
And if you haven't ready either or seen the series, which would be suggested?
I agree. I use my home system for development as well as gaming when I want a break. I find that the needs of my work system (compilation, servers, rendering, network stuff, etc) tend to overlap with a good gaming system. Delays caused by multiple resource hungry applications really tend to add up at the end of the day. Typically when I upgrade I end up with both a development and a gaming system. I push the memory a little more for the development and I push the video card a little more for the gameing. With respect to the processor, it is the same for both*. There also seems to be a good bit of overlap with pc based server systems.
*Though dual processors is more suitable for development, it does help a little with keeping a game on one cpu the other junk on the remaining cpu.
Just thought I would reply to this as I currently have both a 2200 and Doom3. It is indeed solid while playing. No crashes, smooth play, etc. Very enjoyable. I can even crank everything up and it still stays solid. Though, at that point, I can go get a cup of coffee between each frame. The grandparent post is probably correct in its use of "solid". What you are talking about is smooth. With that, you are correct. At high settings, the 2200 (and a medium graphics card) is as smooth as a heart monitor showing flat-line and about as responsive. :P
This is an an excellent reason to develop with the Model-View-Controller paradigm. You can develop the UI to be as complete as you want. It becomes reasonable to turn the prototype into the final product. However, that doesn't mean you can release it right away since the interface is only the view. You still have to develop the other two parts of the architecture. It is good for the customer because you can say yes to their request. It is also good for you since this separation has kept you from accidentally polluting the the rest of the code with the UI prototype/non-prototype. Also you can use separate languages for each part of the MVC architecture. Use a language that suits itself to the UI and then change to something else that better fits the controller and likewise the model.
I was thinking the same thing. Set the SSID to "The passkey is passkey". Encryption enabled but freely available to anyone who is browsing networks.
Don't staple through the Ethernet cable.
I see... so apparently the Internet didn't exist much before 1995? I guess Microsoft invented it when they put a "The Internet" button on the desktop in Windows 95. Wow, the CIA/NSA/FBI/MIB/Illuminati are really getting good in mind control. I could have sworn I was on it constantly before that, along with a whole slew of other researchers, chatters, and gamers. Why don't they just brainwash me into thinking that: a) the Internet only exists in the form of the web, b) I go on the web to see the advertisements and it is everything else I want to block? :P
Actually yes, I would be interested in the references if that wouldn't be too much trouble. I can't say I have heard too much about non-adaptive evolution in the mainstream.