In other words, you're desperately spinning it all to make Linux good and Windows bad. Slashdot could be reporting that the Linux kernel infects your hard drive with trojans, and people would still spin it to involve how bad Windows is somehow.
When someone complains or points out the flaws inherent in a piece of software or process, the coders start talking about how they do it for the love of it in their spare time, and that if someone thinks it should be improved, "code it or shut up."
A tiny line at the bottom that requires you to click "Read More" and find it.
Most reputable places would update the headline or the beginning of the summary at the least. They're basically accusing Dell of something we hate that they in fact don't do.
Couldn't you just use some fractal program to generate infinite detail in a "gigapixel" fractal picture? You could easily beat this guy just by sacrificing a bit of rendering time.
Slackers Guild (shameless plug) ran AdSense banner ads for a time. We told people to click on the products they were interested in. Suddenly, we generated revenue, and Google decided it was too much and cut us off.
Read our articles about it here, here, and for amusement, here and here.
Needless to say, after being owed over a grand and not being paid because Google arbitrarily decided we had violated rules, Google AdWords left a sour taste in our mouths. They accused us of using bots, then when that didn't pan out, accused us of violating some sort of rule by encouraging our readers to--gasp--click on the products they were interested in. Eventually, it dwindled out, and one of us even wrote an ad snatcher for the fun of it.
The really shitty thing during the whole debacle was not only that they were withholding revenue, but how they repeatedly made us out to be the bad guys, claiming we cost them and their advertisers time and money because we gave them a lot of hits. Our site gave their advertisers tons of free exposure on our site. In fact, over a grand's worth.
So what? It's not my responsibility to write code for you. I write code for me, and release it under a license that happens to allow for other people to use it. Don't tell me what code I'm allowed to write and what I'm not.
Translates to:
So what? I don't like to hear complaints, because it reveals how inadequate the state of OSS is. I'm so insecure that when someone mentions a direction I should take, my foaming-at-the-mouth, reptilian mindset views it as a personal insult, as though somebody is wanting me to take responsibility for something, and I don't like responsibility. I'm selfish, and everything I do revolves around me. I contribute code, but expect people to never criticize it. Logically, if I didn't want to hear criticism, I would keep my code on my private network and never release it, but hypocrisy is a fundamental attribute of much of the OSS community.
So what? You have no right to tell me how I should be spending my time. Sure it's not the most productive use of it, but again, it's MY time. If you don't like it, go away.
Translates to:
So what? I take criticism of software so personally that I view it as dictation of my schedule. My completely anti-social, condescending attitude scares away scores of users, but that doesn't matter to me because I maintain a selfish attitude. I tell people to go away if they don't like what I do. Basically, I'm a big baby who can't handle criticism. Users care about results--I care about myself. And then I complain about the non-acceptance of OSS.
WTF? Scratch the wrong itch? Maybe I'm not scratching your itch, but see point 1. If you don't like what I'm doing, write your own. That's what I did when I wrote this software that scratches the 'wrong itch'. It scratched mine just fine.
Translates to:
Hey, if you point out a flaw in an application that is holding it back, fuck you! I wrote what I want. You're just the user, the person using my software, a pawn in my little world of self-control. I expect people to use stuff without question or criticism unless they're uber kernel developers who can contribute code at the drop of a hat. Otherwise, your opinions are meaningless to me, because I scratched my ITCH!
Against us? If you want to point out flaws and the people in the group don't appreciate it, you can take the code and apply your own patches and start up a distribution of that code. If the community agrees with you, then you'll be successful. If you end up being the only one who uses your new version, then maybe you're actually wrong about what you were doing and that entire community against you was actually that you were wrong and too dumb to realize it.
Translates to:
Write code, or shut up. You also can't criticize movies unless you make movies, stories unless you write replacement stories, football players unless you play better football, or music unless you're an expert guitarist. The most important feedback I could ever receive about software--the people using it everyday, end users--I choose to ignore in order to pacify my ego and mindset of being superior to people. And then I complain about the non-acceptance of OSS!
So? This really is the same point as Point 2. And the arguments are the same. So most of us don't like Microsoft? I don't think there are many that won't admit they do some stuff right, but that doesn't matter. It's my time, and I will do with it as I please. If you want to lead by example and convince people there's a better way, a high road, then please, by all means, do so. But telling people who write software that you can use at no cost and have full access to the source that they need to be doing things differently is about the most egocentric thing you could possibly say.
Translates to:
I answer everything with a question. What? Huh? And the ever-classic, WTF? I take it as a personal insult when someone dare
Linux is based more on a community atmosphere, so it's perfectly reasonable to turn to places like USENET or IRC for technical support advice. #debian is a logical place to get help with Debian.
Also, I can guarantee even if there was a #winxp, it would be a friendlier channel than #debian.
You, like many in the OSS community, are more concerned with competing with closed source than with innovating your own projects. It's the reason people say things like, "Slashdot isn't pro-Linux, it's anti-M$."
Yes, it's wrong to make a profit. And the more profit you make, the more "sick" and "amoral" you are.
I'll be sure to make sure my operating expenses are large enough to drown out the amorality of my income to appease the amateur economist Slashdotter who told me so.
Evidently, you either ignorantly or puposely misinterpreted the report, which merely states that 50% of crashes are third-party, and the other 50% are from Windows itself due to bad drivers or other poorly-written OS hooks. Yes, there were other reports about this that stated such.
In other words, half of what Dr. Watson reported was error conditions originating directly from third-party code, while the other half was initiated by Windows code. Hardly a reason to point fingers at "bad" Windows code. The Windows kernel rivals that of Linux in many ways. It's the stuff on top of it that biased people have a problem with.
Look at all the posts...excuses and rationalizations. "Well, this serves as an example of weak passwords" or "non-root privileges," etc.
You never see that level of rational explanation when it comes to a user-transmitted e-mail Outlook worm. In fact, in those cases it magically becomes a "Microsoft hole," even though it's users running the executable!
I know this won't be well-recevied, so Karma Bonus is unchecked accordingly. Nonetheless, it's my opinion and I believe it. Slashdotters are hypocrites and hold double-standards.
On the same token, respect people who demand a little professionalism and happen to dislike something that's fighting to be taken seriously being called "Stoned Beaver."
That sort of unprofessionalism and contradictory development would be stomped out in any organization that had a financial investment in producing professional, streamlined output.
I'm sure I'll be marked as "Troll" for that, so I unchecked karma bonus accordingly. Just stating my opinion.
Slashdot Mirror
It's Waldo.
In other words, you're desperately spinning it all to make Linux good and Windows bad. Slashdot could be reporting that the Linux kernel infects your hard drive with trojans, and people would still spin it to involve how bad Windows is somehow.
Prove your "1000 boxen" claim.
That's complete crap. Look how you're spinning this. A high-profile Gentoo Linux breach, and some Slashdotter STILL finds a way to bash Microsoft.
When someone complains or points out the flaws inherent in a piece of software or process, the coders start talking about how they do it for the love of it in their spare time, and that if someone thinks it should be improved, "code it or shut up."
A tiny line at the bottom that requires you to click "Read More" and find it.
Most reputable places would update the headline or the beginning of the summary at the least. They're basically accusing Dell of something we hate that they in fact don't do.
I did "RTFA."
Fractals are considered artistic. I was just curious if you could use a fractal program to do that.
Whoever modded me as a "Troll" is, frankly, an idiot.
Couldn't you just use some fractal program to generate infinite detail in a "gigapixel" fractal picture? You could easily beat this guy just by sacrificing a bit of rendering time.
Slackers Guild (shameless plug) ran AdSense banner ads for a time. We told people to click on the products they were interested in. Suddenly, we generated revenue, and Google decided it was too much and cut us off.
Read our articles about it here, here, and for amusement, here and here.
Needless to say, after being owed over a grand and not being paid because Google arbitrarily decided we had violated rules, Google AdWords left a sour taste in our mouths. They accused us of using bots, then when that didn't pan out, accused us of violating some sort of rule by encouraging our readers to--gasp--click on the products they were interested in. Eventually, it dwindled out, and one of us even wrote an ad snatcher for the fun of it.
The really shitty thing during the whole debacle was not only that they were withholding revenue, but how they repeatedly made us out to be the bad guys, claiming we cost them and their advertisers time and money because we gave them a lot of hits. Our site gave their advertisers tons of free exposure on our site. In fact, over a grand's worth.
Ah, so you're the one who abused editor privileges and modded down those "Dirty Secret" comments. Thanks for outing yourself.
When I read your post, this is what I really see:
So what? It's not my responsibility to write code for you. I write code for me, and release it under a license that happens to allow for other people to use it. Don't tell me what code I'm allowed to write and what I'm not.
Translates to:
So what? I don't like to hear complaints, because it reveals how inadequate the state of OSS is. I'm so insecure that when someone mentions a direction I should take, my foaming-at-the-mouth, reptilian mindset views it as a personal insult, as though somebody is wanting me to take responsibility for something, and I don't like responsibility. I'm selfish, and everything I do revolves around me. I contribute code, but expect people to never criticize it. Logically, if I didn't want to hear criticism, I would keep my code on my private network and never release it, but hypocrisy is a fundamental attribute of much of the OSS community.
So what? You have no right to tell me how I should be spending my time. Sure it's not the most productive use of it, but again, it's MY time. If you don't like it, go away.
Translates to:
So what? I take criticism of software so personally that I view it as dictation of my schedule. My completely anti-social, condescending attitude scares away scores of users, but that doesn't matter to me because I maintain a selfish attitude. I tell people to go away if they don't like what I do. Basically, I'm a big baby who can't handle criticism. Users care about results--I care about myself. And then I complain about the non-acceptance of OSS.
WTF? Scratch the wrong itch? Maybe I'm not scratching your itch, but see point 1. If you don't like what I'm doing, write your own. That's what I did when I wrote this software that scratches the 'wrong itch'. It scratched mine just fine.
Translates to:
Hey, if you point out a flaw in an application that is holding it back, fuck you! I wrote what I want. You're just the user, the person using my software, a pawn in my little world of self-control. I expect people to use stuff without question or criticism unless they're uber kernel developers who can contribute code at the drop of a hat. Otherwise, your opinions are meaningless to me, because I scratched my ITCH!
Against us? If you want to point out flaws and the people in the group don't appreciate it, you can take the code and apply your own patches and start up a distribution of that code. If the community agrees with you, then you'll be successful. If you end up being the only one who uses your new version, then maybe you're actually wrong about what you were doing and that entire community against you was actually that you were wrong and too dumb to realize it.
Translates to:
Write code, or shut up. You also can't criticize movies unless you make movies, stories unless you write replacement stories, football players unless you play better football, or music unless you're an expert guitarist. The most important feedback I could ever receive about software--the people using it everyday, end users--I choose to ignore in order to pacify my ego and mindset of being superior to people. And then I complain about the non-acceptance of OSS!
So? This really is the same point as Point 2. And the arguments are the same. So most of us don't like Microsoft? I don't think there are many that won't admit they do some stuff right, but that doesn't matter. It's my time, and I will do with it as I please. If you want to lead by example and convince people there's a better way, a high road, then please, by all means, do so. But telling people who write software that you can use at no cost and have full access to the source that they need to be doing things differently is about the most egocentric thing you could possibly say.
Translates to:
I answer everything with a question. What? Huh? And the ever-classic, WTF? I take it as a personal insult when someone dare
Does it change the fact that DVD playback in Linux is a difficulty?
No. Then his point is valid. End users don't care about legal reasons, they care about results.
Linux is based more on a community atmosphere, so it's perfectly reasonable to turn to places like USENET or IRC for technical support advice. #debian is a logical place to get help with Debian.
Also, I can guarantee even if there was a #winxp, it would be a friendlier channel than #debian.
You, like many in the OSS community, are more concerned with competing with closed source than with innovating your own projects. It's the reason people say things like, "Slashdot isn't pro-Linux, it's anti-M$."
Yes, it's wrong to make a profit. And the more profit you make, the more "sick" and "amoral" you are.
I'll be sure to make sure my operating expenses are large enough to drown out the amorality of my income to appease the amateur economist Slashdotter who told me so.
Will Slashdot report it if it does?
All signs point to no.
...except that it was because of a beta driver.
Remember the filesystem-corrupting "greased turkey" Linux release? Oh...okay.
...of the byline in this very article that michael posted. Come on, moderators.
Evidently, you either ignorantly or puposely misinterpreted the report, which merely states that 50% of crashes are third-party, and the other 50% are from Windows itself due to bad drivers or other poorly-written OS hooks. Yes, there were other reports about this that stated such.
In other words, half of what Dr. Watson reported was error conditions originating directly from third-party code, while the other half was initiated by Windows code. Hardly a reason to point fingers at "bad" Windows code. The Windows kernel rivals that of Linux in many ways. It's the stuff on top of it that biased people have a problem with.
Look at all the posts...excuses and rationalizations. "Well, this serves as an example of weak passwords" or "non-root privileges," etc.
You never see that level of rational explanation when it comes to a user-transmitted e-mail Outlook worm. In fact, in those cases it magically becomes a "Microsoft hole," even though it's users running the executable!
I know this won't be well-recevied, so Karma Bonus is unchecked accordingly. Nonetheless, it's my opinion and I believe it. Slashdotters are hypocrites and hold double-standards.
Jeesh. Slashdotters amaze me sometimes.
Did it ever occur to you that someone might want to hack a high-profile Linux site...I don't know, for the same reasons they hack any other sites?
They said the password was sniffed.
Try to shunt this off to a "weak password" all you want, but let's face facts here. A beloved Linux network was clobbered.
Yes, Virgina, Linux is not invincible. You have rootkits and exploits too. Just see Linuxsecurity sometime.
And, yes, it makes all the Linux loonies who rail on about Microsoft insecurities look like religious hypocrites.
Karma Bonus unchecked, because I don't expect this to be well-received by biased moderators.
Then why did all the other test releases get headline news?
On the same token, respect people who demand a little professionalism and happen to dislike something that's fighting to be taken seriously being called "Stoned Beaver."
Slashdot is a corporate-owned website in the business of generating page hits for banner ads and subscriptions.
That sort of unprofessionalism and contradictory development would be stomped out in any organization that had a financial investment in producing professional, streamlined output.
I'm sure I'll be marked as "Troll" for that, so I unchecked karma bonus accordingly. Just stating my opinion.