We (the americans) recognize no differences in countries. You (the rest of the world) do not have the means nor the desire to resist us. We will go into any country we want and take by force if neccasary any person who we deem to be a criminal. We did it with noriega and we will do it with Bin Laden. Once you are labeled a terrorist or whatever there is nothing you can do to stop us from coming into tyour country and getting who we want. We are not above killing anybody who stands in our way either. So unless you have some serious weaponry or are a citizen of Israel (who are untouchable) then you better heed.
"Wow! A bug-free program! Has the press been notiied?"
I did not say it was bug free I said that there are no dependecy problems. Apt is able to figure out dependencies automatically. As for bugs I have never encountered an apt bug in normal use which is more then I can say for any windows program including installshield.
"Personally, I'm not; then again, I'm just admining a single home box. Administrators tend to be jumpy about this sort of thing. It comes down to this: what is on the CD is unchangeable. What is on the net is inherently changeable."
I think you are severely misinformed about how apt works. Fist of all what's on the CD is no more trustable then what's on the internet. For all practical purposes you have no idea about who put it on the CD and what's on the inside of the packages. This goes for both windows and linux programs. Secondly you straw man argument about packages changing on the net is simply would not happen. Apt compares the checksums of the downloaded packages against the advertised checksum and if they don't match it will not install them. This simple act makes it infinately more secure then your CD or any windows application you may have bought or downloaded from the net.
"As I said: convenience. Knowing that I can download a single package that contains all the disparate pieces needed to install a program."
I can think of no other operating system that offers this. I can not count the number of times I have tried to install some package from MS and have had to stop because I was missing some later version of MDAC or IE. It's ridiculus to expect that every program would include every single possible dependecy. It would not even fit on the CD. Just recently I was trying to install the SOAP toolkit from MS and I had to download thirty megabytes of other stuff (including a later version of IE) just to install and use three DLLs.
Nobody can insure what you are asking for not MS, not Apple, not sun and not IBM. Why is it that you insist the people who do something in their spare time do it better then billion dollar companies and accomplish impossible tasks that decades of man hours and billions of R&D have not been able to accomplish? Why do you use a different yardstick for free software? If you ask me apt is clearly superior to anything MS has come up with to date and that is an accomplishment to be proud of.
BTW if you really want to manage a group of packages from a CD just change your apt-sources to point to the CD. Then do a apt-get update and apt-get upgrade and you are done. If you really want to get tricky learn how to use apt.preferences
First of all there are no dependency problems with apt.
If the package is on the CD you can install it with dpkg (or some gui equavalent). You don't need to download anything or change your apt.sources
Why are you afraid of downloading something from the net and installing it but not afraid to install a monster package from some CD? Both are black boxes as far as you are concerned except that apt-get install performs checksums for you. In effect it's safer then installing it from CD.
Besides if you want to take apart a massive package and examine each package why do you want a install program in the first place?
They will stop you like they stop all their other competitors.
1) They make their customers agree to not buy anything from you. If their customers buy anything from you they lose the ability to buy MS products.
2) They get patents on stuff you make and sue you thereby bankrupting you.
3) They make whatever you make and give it away for free, not only that but they make everybody who has any MS product take that product as well.
4) They file frivolous suits against you and bankrupt you.
5) They lobby legislature to make what you are doing illegal.
6) They simply kill you (via third parties of course). If none of the above work I am sure you could die in an unfortunate accident of some sort.
It's clearly the responsibility of the govt to ensure a healthy marketplace. One way it can do this is with breaking up monopolies when they become abusive.
As for your whack-a-mole analogy it makes no sense. It's inevitable that in a free market economy one company will win. It will dominate and crush all other companies and form a monopoly which will then turn around squeeze the customers who have no choice. This is a natural byproduct of any free enterprise environment. If the govt does not whack that mole the mole will harm the consumer.
To claim that you should not quash monopolies because other ones will re-appear is to claim that you should not put out fires because other beuildings will burn too. Or that you should not arrest criminals because more criminals will pop up.
Everything has consequences. Fixing things have consequences just as not fixing them has consequences. I am sure you are not advocating sitting on your ass and not doing anything because what you do might have unintended consequences are you?
"Wishing physical harm on someone just because he's ruthless and successful in his business practice?"
He is not just ruthless he is also a criminal. His organization is criminal, he has perjured himself, his underlings have perjured themselves and tampered with evidence. He and his cohorts have also intimidated witnesses in a federal trial. All of these acts are criminal and by all rights he should be jail right now.
Please do not try to minimize the criminal acts commited by MS and their top brass bringing their success up. Of course they are successful they resorted to crimes when everybody else was playing within the bounds of the law. It's an unfair advantage and one that our legal system ought to rectify.
BTW. Although it's not a crime I have not read one interview or statement from any MS executive which did not contain at least one lie. These people are pathological liars.
Is it right to with criminals death? Well maybe not but I do wish they would serve their time in jail.
Nice series of speculations and nonsense there. The FSF is needed because they fight for their (and our) rights. It's an organzied and somewhat funded agency which has some clout and is willing to go to court to defend their license. I sure as hell don't have the resources to fight corporations if they steal my code but the FSF may.
Everybody has a right to try and sell their point of view and to lobby whoever they want. MS and other software companies are lobbying right now to try and make open source developement a crime and you fret over the FSF. Get some perspective
Then he would actually have to think and write his own code. Don't you see? he wants to use other peoples code but does not want to honor their terms. That's the crux of the matter here. He wants something for nothing.
"Are you suggesting that murder is the only crime committed where the perpetrator used a gun"
No I am suggesting that murder counts for more. If the overall crime rate went down because the number of murders went up while the number of muggings went down then I would still count that as a bad thing.
Count the number of new languages coming out every year that are open source and then count the number of new languages coming out of MS every year. Tell me which one is greater. C# is nothing but an answer to java and hardly represents some sort of a breakthrough. Just another virtual machine that's probably slower then rebol and runs only on one platform.
I honestly don't know where you get that there is no programing language research in the open source world or that every single open source project is written in C. I especially don't see your point regarding MS. What major (or minor) software from MS is written in a higher level language? I honestly can't think of one.
You may be right. I think that they learned very well from American terrorists. They most likely break into small cells of 20 people or so. The American terrorists actually like to keep that number in the single digits but it's probably harder to be international with that small of a cell. So yes there is only so much money that can be raised with small cells and I would guess 100K is certainly doable.
Although they are small cells it's obvious that there is some sort of centralized control. I think this because they have never repeated and attack at the same targets or the same way. While the smaller bands and less organized palestenians constantly repeat the same patterns (car bombs, suicides etc) these guys never do the same thing twice. Instead of many repeated small acts of violence they save up, plan and excute a big one.
I shudder to think what their retaliation to bombing of kabul, damascus, bagdad etc will be like. I am guessing right now it's going to be biological or chemical but that seems too obvious whatever it will be it will make WTC look like childs play I bet.
Wow nice series of non sequiters. Were you half asleep when you wrote them or were you just high?
No wonder MS software is so shitty when their (supposedly) best and brightest can't make a point to save his life.
Just what exactly is your point? Here is what I get.
1) The less people who look at the code the better the code is.
2) Higher level languages are better then lower level languages.
3) All microsoft products are (will be ) written in higher level languages including the operating system itself and that's why they are (will be) better. BTW is there some microsoft school of speaking in future tense? It seems like every MS employee always talks about how something will be so great when it finally comes out and of course when the thing pops out of the oven half baked they start talking about the next big thing.
4) All linux software is written in lower level languages which is why they suck.
5) Device drivers are written in lower languages. In a thing called the vault (what the fuck does this have anything to do with anything?).
6) Efficiency does not matter because the hardware is getting faster.
Lowered crime rates can be attributed to any thing. It could mean an aging population especially in florida, it could mean greater police presence or it could just be a part of the overall lowering of crime nationwide. You can not simply point at one thing and say "here this is why crime is lower" especially when crime is decreasing in areas with tighter gun control laws like New York.
Also gun related crimes may be up while the overall crime rate drops. There could be more murders but less muggings or shoplifting.
So I for one don't buy the fact that the lowered crime rate is only due to gun laws or even primarily gun laws.
Show me a detailed breakdown of crime figures, comare them with accidental deaths due to guns and compare against states with tougher gun laws and do a real study and then I might listen.
I was guessing over a 100K. There were pilot lessons involved and quite a bit of international travel. It looks like they raised the money by short selling insurance stocks just before terrorist attacks.
I am looking forward to the day when I see an MS operating system written in C# or SML.NET (whatever that is). I bet MS office written in C# will be screamer.
You are presuming of course that the security would have actually prevented them from getting aboard. A toy knife? a box cutter who imagined that these could be used to hijack a plane before the 11th? Nobody. Even if the security staff decided they were too dangerous they would have simply taken them away and let the people get on the plane anyway.
I would imagine that it would be pretty easy to shave your head or wear glasses or a fake nose or beard or something to fool the cameras. I bet that if a person really wanted to go undetected they could with a 99.99 percent probability. Remember this was planned ahead perhaps for years and they had plenty of funding. if push came to shove they could even get facelifts or something.
I think a 25% hit ratio and people purposfully disguising themselves is just naive.
It has to do with trust. Microsoft has a history of unethical and sleazy behavior. While Visa and mastercard also have had bouts with sleazy behavior it certainly has not been the same pathological degree.
I for one would much rather trust Visa then MS about anything. If Bill gates offered to babysit my kids I'd refuse.
"armed citizens" means a gang of trigger-happy imbecils just waiting to spray a hail of lead at whomever?"
Because americans have history of acting in a trigger happy manner. People in this country get shot for cutting others off in traffic, looking at the wrong girl, saying something unpopular, and of course being the wrong color. Increase the percentage of people with guns and you are going to increase the percentage of people dying at the hands of them. It makes sense to me why doesn't it make sense to you?
Yet you still want to bomb them how ironic. When you drop bombs on Kabul you are dropping bombs exactly on those arabs who are NOT killers. You are dropping the bomb on the poorest and most feeblest who had no means to escape the coming massacre. The taliban who have vehicles and communication have already left kabul. SO you will take the most desparate people in the world and kill about 70 to 80% of them. Do you think the rest will now feel relieved and grateful? How did you convince yourself that the survivors of such a bombing would be grateful? These people who now have no homes, no food, no water will hit the road and try to get to pakistan, iran, or wherever they can and they will hate you for eternity, they will teach their children to hate you and they will tell everybody they meet the horrors you inflicted on them. And yes eventually they will try to hit back any way they can. If they don't make it europe or the US maybe their children will or maybe one of the others who heard first hand about you killing babies with bombs will.
Remember these people don't have f-15s, or stealth bombers they will hit back with weapons that are easy to make and use namely chemical and biological agents.
"Instead of being so relentlessly pessimistic, why don't you look at the fact that this has the potential to unite the world?"
Maybe you are young but I am not. Maybe I once thought like you but I no longer do. If it was possible to unite the world it would have been done by now.
People are inherently selfish and evil. It takes effort to be good, to raise yourself above your lizard brain and to engage the higher thinking functions. Most people are not willing to put forth the effort. Like you said 70% of the US thinks that we ought to start indiscriminate bombing of brown people. People all over the country are being hassled, shot, and assaulted because they have brown skin. Most of the idiots can't distinguish between a mexican, indian, native american or an arab. Have you heard the stories? Have you read about the mosque being burned down in texas? Have you heard about the indian who was shot in the back because he was wearing a turban? This is happening in your own country supposedly the most enlightened and modern nation on the planet. The Gods chosen land, the land of the free, the home of the brave. Where everybody has enought to eat and a car to drive and a TV to watch we are a festering bunch of people all dedicated to getting what's ours while screaming that other people should do without. Visit the west one time and see the level of hatred that exists for "commie, pinko, tree hugging, fags" , femminists, and of course for the all evil federal guvmit.
If the people in the richest country in the world can't get along what makes you think all of the world with it's different cultures, languages, races and wealth levels are going to?
I'll quote a steely dan song (that ought to date me).
"A world become one,
of salad and sun,
only a fool would say that"
Slashdot Mirror
We (the americans) recognize no differences in countries. You (the rest of the world) do not have the means nor the desire to resist us. We will go into any country we want and take by force if neccasary any person who we deem to be a criminal. We did it with noriega and we will do it with Bin Laden. Once you are labeled a terrorist or whatever there is nothing you can do to stop us from coming into tyour country and getting who we want. We are not above killing anybody who stands in our way either. So unless you have some serious weaponry or are a citizen of Israel (who are untouchable) then you better heed.
" Every C.T.O. in the world should be alarmed at Microsoft being able to download and run any code they feel like"
Your typical CTO can not pick his nose and watch TV at the same time let alone read and understand a EULA.
"Wow! A bug-free program! Has the press been notiied?"
I did not say it was bug free I said that there are no dependecy problems. Apt is able to figure out dependencies automatically. As for bugs I have never encountered an apt bug in normal use which is more then I can say for any windows program including installshield.
"Personally, I'm not; then again, I'm just admining a single home box. Administrators tend to be jumpy about this sort of thing. It comes down to this: what is on the CD is unchangeable. What is on the net is inherently changeable."
I think you are severely misinformed about how apt works. Fist of all what's on the CD is no more trustable then what's on the internet. For all practical purposes you have no idea about who put it on the CD and what's on the inside of the packages. This goes for both windows and linux programs. Secondly you straw man argument about packages changing on the net is simply would not happen. Apt compares the checksums of the downloaded packages against the advertised checksum and if they don't match it will not install them. This simple act makes it infinately more secure then your CD or any windows application you may have bought or downloaded from the net.
"As I said: convenience. Knowing that I can download a single package that contains all the disparate pieces needed to install a program."
I can think of no other operating system that offers this. I can not count the number of times I have tried to install some package from MS and have had to stop because I was missing some later version of MDAC or IE. It's ridiculus to expect that every program would include every single possible dependecy. It would not even fit on the CD. Just recently I was trying to install the SOAP toolkit from MS and I had to download thirty megabytes of other stuff (including a later version of IE) just to install and use three DLLs.
Nobody can insure what you are asking for not MS, not Apple, not sun and not IBM. Why is it that you insist the people who do something in their spare time do it better then billion dollar companies and accomplish impossible tasks that decades of man hours and billions of R&D have not been able to accomplish? Why do you use a different yardstick for free software? If you ask me apt is clearly superior to anything MS has come up with to date and that is an accomplishment to be proud of.
BTW if you really want to manage a group of packages from a CD just change your apt-sources to point to the CD. Then do a apt-get update and apt-get upgrade and you are done. If you really want to get tricky learn how to use apt.preferences
Some what you say makes no sense.
First of all there are no dependency problems with apt.
If the package is on the CD you can install it with dpkg (or some gui equavalent). You don't need to download anything or change your apt.sources
Why are you afraid of downloading something from the net and installing it but not afraid to install a monster package from some CD? Both are black boxes as far as you are concerned except that apt-get install performs checksums for you. In effect it's safer then installing it from CD.
Besides if you want to take apart a massive package and examine each package why do you want a install program in the first place?
They will stop you like they stop all their other competitors.
1) They make their customers agree to not buy anything from you. If their customers buy anything from you they lose the ability to buy MS products.
2) They get patents on stuff you make and sue you thereby bankrupting you.
3) They make whatever you make and give it away for free, not only that but they make everybody who has any MS product take that product as well.
4) They file frivolous suits against you and bankrupt you.
5) They lobby legislature to make what you are doing illegal.
6) They simply kill you (via third parties of course). If none of the above work I am sure you could die in an unfortunate accident of some sort.
It's clearly the responsibility of the govt to ensure a healthy marketplace. One way it can do this is with breaking up monopolies when they become abusive.
As for your whack-a-mole analogy it makes no sense. It's inevitable that in a free market economy one company will win. It will dominate and crush all other companies and form a monopoly which will then turn around squeeze the customers who have no choice. This is a natural byproduct of any free enterprise environment. If the govt does not whack that mole the mole will harm the consumer.
To claim that you should not quash monopolies because other ones will re-appear is to claim that you should not put out fires because other beuildings will burn too. Or that you should not arrest criminals because more criminals will pop up.
Everything has consequences. Fixing things have consequences just as not fixing them has consequences. I am sure you are not advocating sitting on your ass and not doing anything because what you do might have unintended consequences are you?
"Wishing physical harm on someone just because he's ruthless and successful in his business practice?"
He is not just ruthless he is also a criminal. His organization is criminal, he has perjured himself, his underlings have perjured themselves and tampered with evidence. He and his cohorts have also intimidated witnesses in a federal trial. All of these acts are criminal and by all rights he should be jail right now.
Please do not try to minimize the criminal acts commited by MS and their top brass bringing their success up. Of course they are successful they resorted to crimes when everybody else was playing within the bounds of the law. It's an unfair advantage and one that our legal system ought to rectify.
BTW. Although it's not a crime I have not read one interview or statement from any MS executive which did not contain at least one lie. These people are pathological liars.
Is it right to with criminals death? Well maybe not but I do wish they would serve their time in jail.
Nice series of speculations and nonsense there. The FSF is needed because they fight for their (and our) rights. It's an organzied and somewhat funded agency which has some clout and is willing to go to court to defend their license. I sure as hell don't have the resources to fight corporations if they steal my code but the FSF may.
Everybody has a right to try and sell their point of view and to lobby whoever they want. MS and other software companies are lobbying right now to try and make open source developement a crime and you fret over the FSF. Get some perspective
Then he would actually have to think and write his own code. Don't you see? he wants to use other peoples code but does not want to honor their terms. That's the crux of the matter here. He wants something for nothing.
"Are you suggesting that murder is the only crime committed where the perpetrator used a gun"
No I am suggesting that murder counts for more. If the overall crime rate went down because the number of murders went up while the number of muggings went down then I would still count that as a bad thing.
Count the number of new languages coming out every year that are open source and then count the number of new languages coming out of MS every year. Tell me which one is greater. C# is nothing but an answer to java and hardly represents some sort of a breakthrough. Just another virtual machine that's probably slower then rebol and runs only on one platform.
I honestly don't know where you get that there is no programing language research in the open source world or that every single open source project is written in C. I especially don't see your point regarding MS. What major (or minor) software from MS is written in a higher level language? I honestly can't think of one.
You may be right. I think that they learned very well from American terrorists. They most likely break into small cells of 20 people or so. The American terrorists actually like to keep that number in the single digits but it's probably harder to be international with that small of a cell. So yes there is only so much money that can be raised with small cells and I would guess 100K is certainly doable.
Although they are small cells it's obvious that there is some sort of centralized control. I think this because they have never repeated and attack at the same targets or the same way. While the smaller bands and less organized palestenians constantly repeat the same patterns (car bombs, suicides etc) these guys never do the same thing twice. Instead of many repeated small acts of violence they save up, plan and excute a big one.
I shudder to think what their retaliation to bombing of kabul, damascus, bagdad etc will be like. I am guessing right now it's going to be biological or chemical but that seems too obvious whatever it will be it will make WTC look like childs play I bet.
Wow nice series of non sequiters. Were you half asleep when you wrote them or were you just high?
No wonder MS software is so shitty when their (supposedly) best and brightest can't make a point to save his life.
Just what exactly is your point? Here is what I get.
1) The less people who look at the code the better the code is.
2) Higher level languages are better then lower level languages.
3) All microsoft products are (will be ) written in higher level languages including the operating system itself and that's why they are (will be) better. BTW is there some microsoft school of speaking in future tense? It seems like every MS employee always talks about how something will be so great when it finally comes out and of course when the thing pops out of the oven half baked they start talking about the next big thing.
4) All linux software is written in lower level languages which is why they suck.
5) Device drivers are written in lower languages. In a thing called the vault (what the fuck does this have anything to do with anything?).
6) Efficiency does not matter because the hardware is getting faster.
Did I get all that right?
Lowered crime rates can be attributed to any thing. It could mean an aging population especially in florida, it could mean greater police presence or it could just be a part of the overall lowering of crime nationwide. You can not simply point at one thing and say "here this is why crime is lower" especially when crime is decreasing in areas with tighter gun control laws like New York.
Also gun related crimes may be up while the overall crime rate drops. There could be more murders but less muggings or shoplifting.
So I for one don't buy the fact that the lowered crime rate is only due to gun laws or even primarily gun laws.
Show me a detailed breakdown of crime figures, comare them with accidental deaths due to guns and compare against states with tougher gun laws and do a real study and then I might listen.
I was guessing over a 100K. There were pilot lessons involved and quite a bit of international travel. It looks like they raised the money by short selling insurance stocks just before terrorist attacks.
I am looking forward to the day when I see an MS operating system written in C# or SML.NET (whatever that is). I bet MS office written in C# will be screamer.
You are presuming of course that the security would have actually prevented them from getting aboard. A toy knife? a box cutter who imagined that these could be used to hijack a plane before the 11th? Nobody. Even if the security staff decided they were too dangerous they would have simply taken them away and let the people get on the plane anyway.
I would imagine that it would be pretty easy to shave your head or wear glasses or a fake nose or beard or something to fool the cameras. I bet that if a person really wanted to go undetected they could with a 99.99 percent probability. Remember this was planned ahead perhaps for years and they had plenty of funding. if push came to shove they could even get facelifts or something.
I think a 25% hit ratio and people purposfully disguising themselves is just naive.
Read further. It sates that the terms can change any time without notice to you. All they have to do is to decide to sell and voila it's all good.
It has to do with trust. Microsoft has a history of unethical and sleazy behavior. While Visa and mastercard also have had bouts with sleazy behavior it certainly has not been the same pathological degree.
I for one would much rather trust Visa then MS about anything. If Bill gates offered to babysit my kids I'd refuse.
"armed citizens" means a gang of trigger-happy imbecils just waiting to spray a hail of lead at whomever?"
Because americans have history of acting in a trigger happy manner. People in this country get shot for cutting others off in traffic, looking at the wrong girl, saying something unpopular, and of course being the wrong color. Increase the percentage of people with guns and you are going to increase the percentage of people dying at the hands of them. It makes sense to me why doesn't it make sense to you?
"not all Arabs all psychopathic mass murderers."
Yet you still want to bomb them how ironic. When you drop bombs on Kabul you are dropping bombs exactly on those arabs who are NOT killers. You are dropping the bomb on the poorest and most feeblest who had no means to escape the coming massacre. The taliban who have vehicles and communication have already left kabul. SO you will take the most desparate people in the world and kill about 70 to 80% of them. Do you think the rest will now feel relieved and grateful? How did you convince yourself that the survivors of such a bombing would be grateful? These people who now have no homes, no food, no water will hit the road and try to get to pakistan, iran, or wherever they can and they will hate you for eternity, they will teach their children to hate you and they will tell everybody they meet the horrors you inflicted on them. And yes eventually they will try to hit back any way they can. If they don't make it europe or the US maybe their children will or maybe one of the others who heard first hand about you killing babies with bombs will.
Remember these people don't have f-15s, or stealth bombers they will hit back with weapons that are easy to make and use namely chemical and biological agents.
"Instead of being so relentlessly pessimistic, why don't you look at the fact that this has the potential to unite the world?"
Maybe you are young but I am not. Maybe I once thought like you but I no longer do. If it was possible to unite the world it would have been done by now.
People are inherently selfish and evil. It takes effort to be good, to raise yourself above your lizard brain and to engage the higher thinking functions. Most people are not willing to put forth the effort. Like you said 70% of the US thinks that we ought to start indiscriminate bombing of brown people. People all over the country are being hassled, shot, and assaulted because they have brown skin. Most of the idiots can't distinguish between a mexican, indian, native american or an arab. Have you heard the stories? Have you read about the mosque being burned down in texas? Have you heard about the indian who was shot in the back because he was wearing a turban? This is happening in your own country supposedly the most enlightened and modern nation on the planet. The Gods chosen land, the land of the free, the home of the brave. Where everybody has enought to eat and a car to drive and a TV to watch we are a festering bunch of people all dedicated to getting what's ours while screaming that other people should do without. Visit the west one time and see the level of hatred that exists for "commie, pinko, tree hugging, fags" , femminists, and of course for the all evil federal guvmit.
If the people in the richest country in the world can't get along what makes you think all of the world with it's different cultures, languages, races and wealth levels are going to?
I'll quote a steely dan song (that ought to date me).
"A world become one,
of salad and sun,
only a fool would say that"
How is he going to fix the problem himself? All he could do is ask MS and cross his fingers it's not like he has the source code or something.
Where are my points when I need them.