I wonder what it means if you happen to use all three (Firefox, Chrome, and Opera), often at the same time? Triple the IQ? Sadly, I don't think it's additive. Oh well.
On the plus side, studies such as this one give Opera users some validation. I don't like Opera, I've tried it numerous times, and it's just not a browser I'm fond of. Nevertheless, it's good to see the underdog get positive press coverage even if most of the posts here are likely to be flamebait.
really. what kind of people are you letting you run your country and corporations and corporations' lackey organizations ? idiots ? morons ? bastards ? i think the last one is more likely. (i am not able to bring myself to say ngo regarding mpaa after that kind of idiocy)
Can I say "all of the above?"
Actually, I can think of a few more colorful metaphors to describe the individuals in power here in the US, but they're highly inappropriate in mixed company. I'm also not so sure they'd adequately describe how I feel about our "leadership."
The problem is that Notch is not staying focused. He is trying to make Minecraft everything to everyone.
I think Notch is doing what Notch wants to do more than he is attempting to appease individual groups. And you know what? That's fine by me. It's his game.
You've written a number of gripes in this thread toward Minecraft, and my immediate response is "Okay, you paid for it. If you don't like it, it's just 15 euros, so delete it and find something else." But that seems too obvious. While I can understand your frustration, it seems like a huge waste to reiterate the same disapproval over and over again: Why not spend that time writing mods to make it do something you want it to do (you might find some useful ones for Bukkit that achieve some of your goals)? Can't code and want someone else to do the work? Toss the idea out onto a forum related to Minecraft.
In fact, I would suggest that to almost anyone. Don't like something? Grab a toolkit, hack away, and make something you do like. Who knows? Someone else might take interest and join you. You could turn it into an open source project, or keep it closed and make some money off of it.
There's plenty of games I don't like, but I absolutely refuse to waste a dozen posts on Slashdot reiterating why I don't like them--that's far too dreary. I really sincerely think that you have some good points (I like Minecraft, but I generally don't bore easily either), and I suspect that if you were to put the effort into correcting what deficiencies you see either via modding Minecraft or via rolling your own game, you could very well have something good going on. Endless criticism of a game is okay, but I find that it isn't terribly productive, and considering that most people are fairly receptive to Minecraft, you're unlikely to find many allies except for the handful of very vocal anti-Minecraft types.
Indeed I was. The story is likely apocryphal, but I've witnessed variations on the underlying mindset. I didn't have to exaggerate very much to obtain absurdity.
Not at all. I do find it hilarious that you snagged someone hook, line, and sinker.
Then again, this is Slashdot. Most people never get the jokes...
I believe CptNerd was being sarcastic. My reasoning is because his comment alludes to a story I heard a number of years ago from a member of a pro-ranching PAC. This particular story, as it was relayed to me, goes something like the following:
At a convention or regulatory meeting of sorts, possibly for ranchers, a young environmentalist was espousing the cruelty of keeping animals in such confines. Slaughtering them was a form of murder, after all, and our passionate young friend proposed that all cattle in captivity should be freed so they can live again in the wild as nature intended. Puzzled by the economics of such actions, a rancher asked the young man, "If you free all the cattle, how do you plan on buying meat?"
Without hesitation, the environmentalist replied "At the grocery store like everyone else."
If I hadn't posted in this thread, I'd mod you +1 Insightful But then again, if I hadn't posted, you wouldn't have posted either:) Circular dependency spotted;)
I like that!
If people are wondering abour the rice thing, go check out http://funroll-loops.info/ (Even though I'm not sure I fully understood the joke behind this website)
Hahahaha! I'm glad you picked up on that. I doubt anyone else would have (except for fellow Gentoo users, that is).
I don't completely understand the whole point behind the site either. Perhaps there was some humor in comparing Gentoo users with people who buy inexpensive, often used and under-powered vehicles then promptly glue spoilers and other "bling" to them such that something which is not fast looks fast. That's about as good as I can figure it, though.
On the other hand, I can't help but think that the individual who came up with it was probably somewhat disaffected, disgruntled, jealous, or some permutation thereof and harbored a strange dislike of Gentoo due to a small subset of the community. It completely circumvents the point that a non-trivial number of Gentoo users came from a *BSD background, myself included, precisely because of Portage. I don't see similar complaints about FreeBSD's ports collection which also often requires compilation, for example.
Operating systems are like religion. Everyone has one, and the one they have is the One True Way.
You manage to give a fairly extensive list of what's bad about Portage, but you never actually explain what, specifically, is wrong with Pacman.
I dislike it on personal preference and a whim. Happy? (There's more to it, but I don't feel like iterating endlessly over something that feels like a senseless strawman debate.)
FWIW, I started with Gentoo, and after suffering through that for 3 years I moved onto Debian. Exploring the options about the year ago I found Arch, and it really is the best of both worlds - there's no BS with regular ebuild breaks or wasting time compiling stuff, and yet you get a real rolling release, and new software normally appears in repos same-to-next day after release, so you can stay bleeding edge. I haven't had any problems with Pacman, either - it seems to me that it works much the same as any other binary package manager that I've seen.
I have an Arch install that I periodically run in a VM and discovered that Arch grows very unhappy if you don't update the mirrors list with some regularity, otherwise it appears that there are no updates to be made. Minor annoyances like that quickly turned me off from meddling with it. Of course, before you (or others) cherry pick this comment as an example, please do keep reading. I will confess my ignorance to Arch because I'm not willing to spend a lot of timing learning it.
Now, depending on how I read your post, I would suspect you're simply voicing your dislike with Gentoo and my generalize comments related to Arch. It comes off as hair splitting, which seems counter productive. The real crux of the matter is that it's simply a matter of personal preference. Portage for all its faults is similar to Ports; as I was a long time FreeBSD user, that falls into my comfort zone as something I enjoy.
Pacman is not something I enjoy. My reasons are entirely subjective and certainly unfair. But that's just how it works. That's probably not a good enough answer, but it's the best I can give you.
Aside: If I had to pick exactly one part of Gentoo that I like the most, I would probably select the network configuration. Configuring networks and network interfaces on Gentoo is vastly superior to anything else and is probably one of the most well hidden secrets of the distro.
Yeah, but then I might not be able to be as elitist and pretentious as with Gentoo:(
After all, in the end they're all the same, so it's a matter of taste : you choose the distro that makes you feel better than your peers. The one you're more comfortable trolling for.
I'd suggest not listening to the Arch-peddler you're responding to, particularly because--as you alluded to--he's somewhat trolling.:)
If you're used to Gentoo's emerge, switching to pacman feels like someone splashed acid into your eyeballs. emerge is so much nicer, and Portage is much more predictable in its behavior. Well, with the exceptions of really big changes, blocking packages, new virtual packages, and borked USE flags. Though I've never had much of a problem with actually fixing those issues, and I suspect most die-hard Gentoo users wouldn't either.
Now, I do have to confess that Arch is at least appealing. For instance, Arch does have yaourt which makes user repositories a bit easier to handle than they would seem at first blush, and there's a few other tools I can't think of at the moment that simplify package management. Still, I like the way Portage overlays work; plus Portage has the advantage that it works more like FreeBSD's ports (the whole reason I wound up using Gentoo in the first place!). More importantly, the Gentoo mailing list just seems friendlier. Maybe not as much as the FreeBSD list, but you get the idea. Arch users are just plain weird.:)
So no, while you're joking about Gentoo letting you be "elitist and pretentious" (sadly, I don't think many people will get the joke related to that one site involving rice), I think it's more a matter of pragmatism. Pacman seems horribly convoluted to anyone coming from a ports/portage background. Now, that's not to say that Gentoo/Portage mixed with a binary rolling release system wouldn't be amazing. Wasn't there a project attempted along those lines? (Sabayon? Although I think that has Portage plus another package manager.)
I put a $10 Sound Blaster Audigy2 into my computer and I have decent speakers I paid $50 for and it made a huge difference; I want some Klipsch or whatever the brand is, I love their shit.
I hate to undo some of the moderation I've done in this thread, but it's only +1, Funny mods. So it's not like I'm hurting anyone's karma. I do want to share some personal experience with you before you (potentially) make a purchase now or in the future.
First, I have to agree: Klipsch produces some amazing speakers. The sound quality is outstanding. However, the design of their integrated electronics for the consumer-grade hardware is absolutely terrible. I've gone through a total of about 3 sets of their ProMedia 5.1s (before they were discontinued) simply because the cooling for the MOSFETs is poorly thought out and insufficient. After about a year and a half of pretty constant use, each set suffered the same fate and stopped working. Not to mention that when (when) their personal media sets die, Klipsch will request ~$100 to replace a $2 set of parts--it's almost not worth it. If you can replace the MOSFETs yourself, you're usually OK, except in the case (like my last set) where their proprietary BASH card burned itself out--probably from me not replacing the 'FETs soon enough. Add that to the fact that Klipsch outright refuses to send just the affected component out by itself, requesting that you send the entire subwoofer back (you pay the shipping to them, they pay the return shipping)...
Side note: I have read elsewhere that others have had better luck, and that they've often modded their sets with fans and such. That's not really something I wanted to do, so YMMV.
Anyway, long story short: I eventually replaced my Klipsch speakers with some Logitech Z5500s. The satellites aren't as great as the Klipsch, but Logitech at least mounts a heatsink on the outside of the cabinet. I'm not sure if the Z5500s have been discontinued (can't seem to find them!), but if you can get your hands on a set for a reasonable price, it'd be more than worth it. If the control pod doesn't die within 3 months of ownership, the set seems to last for a good long time (I don't know how common that problem is, though I've spotted a few people with it on the Logitech forums).
On the other hand, Logitech's customer service is crap, especially compared to Klipsch, but I think I'd rather buy a $400 set of speakers that last 10+ years than having to replace a $100 component almost every year...
If you buy Klipsch's speakers proper, you're unlikely to have problems (and you'd need a separate receiver/amp/etc). I don't own any, but from what I've read related to their lower-end offerings, there's quite a few folks who seem to swear by 1) staying away from the low end and 2) buying Klipsch stand alone stuff. I admit, though: their "personal media" offerings don't quite live up to the expectations in terms of longevity that I had. The sound was incredible, though.
Mozilla didn't really go anywhere. Geeks (including me) used it, normal people didn't. Firefox, on the other hand, became successful.
This is an old thread, so I doubt you'll read my post, but you have a very good point here. I was originally going to browse the comments--being unlikely to post--until I saw the AC below who made a rather rude series of remarks professing his ignorance.
Personally, I think it's true what you wrote. Mozilla (the suite) was interesting but bloated. Non-geeks were never going to use it (maybe because of MS' entrenchment, plus Outlook/Outlook Express); Firefox arguably made Mozilla (the foundation) who they are. As an anecdote, my non-techy mother when asked by a friend of hers what browser she used, she immediately quipped "Firefox." Asked about MSIE, and she replied "Ew, who uses that?" Granted, this is largely from my encouragement to my folks to stay away from IE, but I truly think it has nothing to do with the merits of the browser and everything to do with the fact that we geeks initially pushed Firefox to our non-geek friends and family. Because of our efforts, many of them have associated Firefox with security for better or worse.
Thinking back on it, I can only remember one friend of mine who used the Mozilla suite; I refused to use it because it was painfully slow on the hardware I had at the time, but the Gecko engine was something amazing. Mozilla was most assuredly not going anywhere, and in a way that was something of a shame.
I don't buy it (and believe me I won't!). There are lots of strange things that can be made edible (snails, bugs, pond-scum, dogs, cats, etc). Why choose what is probably the most disgusting choice, excrement? And if you have to choose excrement, why does it have to be "human" excrement? TFA even shows the scientist with a bag labelled "shit burgers"! This sounds totally like an attempt at simply getting some hits on You Tube.
Yeah, I don't think it's real. It looks like a belated April Fool's gag (emphasis on gag). The "shit burgers" label on the refrigerator sort of shattered the illusion for me.
I heard of more legitimate research sourcing meat substitutes from insects, and I can't help but think this is just a pun based on that. Though, it does make the bugs seem like a better alternative.
Didn't PETA sue Nintendo in the 90's for promoting violence toward [defenseless] turtles and the capture of animals with the intent to make them fight to the death? I think they also tried boycotting and getting Pokemon banned as well.
I don't specifically remember that, but it wouldn't surprise me. That said, after a cursory search, the only thing I could find was this April Fool's joke.
Oh? Why not? I've been told so many times by fanatical console FPS players that it's so much easier and intuitive
You know, I've never figured out how they can say that. I've never been able to hit the broad side of a barn with those stupid thumbsticks. Unless they're using something like this...
Exactly. They should do their jobs, and pony up for an X-Box. That way their kids can learn to massacare their enemies in a safe and supportive environment, where there is no danger of being exposed to breasts, swear words, or pirated material.
One thing I will give to Nintendo is that they certainly had their market niche locked down very well. Those of us who grew up during the eras of the NES and SNES can certainly attest to that. Sure, maybe stomping anthropomorphic evil mushrooms and turtles qualifies as violence, but I think it was far more wholesome than shooting something and the library of games available to both systems were immense.
Of course, both platforms had their shooters, but I think it is the responsibility of parents to vet what entertainment their children are consuming.
How about actually being a parent? Sitting down with your child and help them use the Internet safely is far better than trying to either force the usage of filtering applications or ranting about why the content is there to begin with.
That's the first thing I thought when I was reading the summary. If he has a 6 year old, why on EARTH would he leave his kid unattended on the Interwebs?! At that age, my parents never left me unattended with so much as our C64. Of course, they may have been frightened I was going to break it...
Even as recent as the middle to late 1980s, my folks spent time with me outdoors and didn't stuff me in front of a television set. Maybe this guy needs to, you know, spend quality time with his kid rather than plunking him down for hours in front of the computer. Or better yet: sit with him!
I think the thing that worries me is that the various papers (most of which are losing readership) are pointing to this report as validation for their own decline when it's most certainly other factors--notably every single one you've mentioned.
As an example, I decided to compare both articles linked in the Slashdot summary: The LA Times article and the AP wire article. Here's the hilarious part:
Neither article discusses much, if anything, about the majority of the FCC's report. For example, nearly every quote (or maybe every quote) was lifted directly from the first page of the FCC's executive summary. No joke. Had they so much as scrolled down, they would have noticed this gem (or maybe they did and they simply don't want to admit it):
Hyperlocal information is better than ever. technology has allowed citizens to help create and share news on a very local levelâ"by town, neighborhood, or even block. these sites mostly do not operate as profitable businesses, but they do not need to. this is journalism as voluntarismâ"a thousand points of news.
While I haven't read through the entire thing--I skimmed it--the FCC report appears to be mostly fair. I find it rather amusing though that two separate stories reported by the press on this same report lifted information from exactly one page and effectively ignored all the others. Better yet: The information they reported fits nicely into their world view (woe is me! the Internet is destroying us!), and outright failing to report the positive sides in the FCC's account. Indeed, if it were not for this same evil technology, and to a certain extent, the Internet, many of the recent stories related to police brutality may have gone unnoticed.
That the press glossed over the FCC's report is unsurprising. They have deadlines to meet, certainly, and with major outlets in a rush to beat all the other outlets, it's easy to see why they would rush out articles of questionable value without so much as reading in its entirety the same report they're reporting. Quantity before quality. Although, isn't it a little odd that the very media suffering economically is latching on to a study discussing their economic suffering and complaining loudly? Fox watching the chicken coup? News at 11.
Tough luck for them. As you pointed out, news for the lowest common denominator is news that many of us are going to have difficulty consuming because it has absolutely no redeeming value. Terrible authoring, frequent mistakes and grammatical errors, and incorrect "facts" lend one to assume that journalists have failed in their craft. For us here on Slashdot, written mistakes aren't a big deal--we're not getting paid to post comments. Journalists, however, are. Worse, when the majority cares so little about the quality of their work, it's no surprise then that their readership would decline.
That's my opinion today. On other days, I think I'm just a paranoid nutjob who should speak with a professional.
Not at all. I agree. (Or maybe that makes me a nutjob, too?)
It is rather frightening the number of abuses that have been made by the very people who profess to be protecting us. There's plenty of examples that have been posted here on/. at a frequency of almost every month, so I have no need to enumerate even a modest list of two or three.
If they win and they're able to, well, "protect" officers from being recorded even in a public place, then there's almost no way to prove that any such abuses ever occur. Like the individual in this last week (or two?) who hid the flash card from his phone in his mouth while law enforcement was stomping it to bits, we'll all wind up in that position. Jack-booted to the ground, hiding some data somewhere on our person, and being threatened with life and limb all because we saw an injustice on a public street.
Actually, that line of thought is really frightening me right now. Perhaps I should stop. Or perhaps I should practice removing the card from my phone as quickly as possible...
Sorry to reply to your post twice, but I missed something: I hadn't noticed that you were the OP I responded to.
Isn't it rather humorous that you provided a far more fair response than others in spite of the fact that you were the one I was responding to (even though my verbiage was decidedly unfair)? That says a lot about the others...
As long as Iowa farmers control the front-runners of the presidency, it's unclear if this will ever change.
This should be modded +1, Sad Truth.
What's absurd is the magnitude of corn shifted into ethanol. I knew it was a lot, but I honestly had no idea that it was such a significant part of our production.
So what happens when we have eco-friendly biofuel but no way to eat?
Yeah for sure. I should have said that you made good points up front. I was just trying to contribute, but there is so much stupid sniping on/. that it doesn't go without saying!
Yeah, definitely. I appreciate your additions (and deserved corrections) to my complaints about the article's author and his comments. I owe you an apology for my somewhat defensive reply for reasons you undoubtedly understand. In fact, you pointed it out! There's really no excuse for my defensive behavior.
Along those lines, I appreciate your response and clarifications. I don't always post on/., and when I do it's often very regular for a period of 2 days, and then I disappear again for the exact reason that I grow gravely frustrated over the general atmosphere (particularly in the political posts).
Go figure. I wish we were isolated from those other sites that shall remain unnamed, but I'm afraid that the basic mentality common elsewhere is slowly bleeding through here, ruining otherwise good conversations. It's pathetic.
Interesting. I hadn't known that it was tested already along those lines...
Legal definitions aside, what is your opinion related to cellphones in a case like this? To me, it would seem that it shouldn't really matter if the recording of police is obvious as long as it is on public grounds. Would that be stretching the notion of "public" too far?
Interestingly, you're the only one of three replies made to my post that makes any sense, and it's quite clear that you're far more fair than the others in your distinction. I would like to thank you for that.
I don't think it's fair to call Palin a hypocrite based on the apparent disconnect between her daughter's actions and Palin's own beliefs. She is also a human being with bills and a kid with Down Syndrome. I can understand her desire to make money through her reality show. I also agree with you that the loss of dignity would be saddening in a serious presidential candidate.
That's also true. I suppose I was being unfair by pointing out that particular part. Allow me to explain my reasoning:
Palin, and for that matter, a significant part of the right wing (and yes, I am a part of it as I mentioned) tends to overtly criticize the lifestyle choices of others while overlooking their own issues close to home. To that extent, I see it as something hypocritical. That's probably unfair of me, because I can't really recall any instances where Palin herself outwardly criticized someone else's family and/or children. However, the portion of our political spectrum she represents is pretty vocal along those lines, so while I'd like to suggest if fair to attach her to them in kind, maybe it's not. Thoughts?
Sometimes I think that there's a small chance she might somehow win, in which case I wish everyone would simultaneously agree to stop talking about her. Other times it seems like very little more will come from discussing her, so continued discussion is innocuous enough to just be interesting, like a solar flare or a dog dancing on YouTube is interesting to discuss. Still other times she seems to rile up everyone enough that she should really be ignored. I just don't know.... The first option seems most likely, which is what I usually act according to.
I don't want Obama to win, so that's probably one of the points we would disagree on. However, I don't particularly want Palin to run, either. She's too vitriolic and has far too much political baggage at this point. On the other hand, I do think it's likewise very sad that the two strongest female personalities in recent political history (think Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton) have essentially been demonized for their entire careers, and it probably suggests a great deal about a certain level of sexism that exists in our political system. I don't know.
Regardless, I do wish to thank you for being extremely fair in your response to me, and it's clear that you read through and followed my points (agreement or not being moot). It's just a shame that 2/3rds of the replies I received were inflammatory and inane. Thanks again for being fair and even handed.
I don't normally reply to ACs unless they state something really stupid, even if it is a vague attempt at trolling. In this case, I think you've succeeded.
'Left' and 'Right'. These are not organized, monolithic groups that can be so easily categorized. These terms almost always indicate lazy thinking and lazy writing.
For the sake of concise arguments, it's often better to boil things down to a more easily understood and digested premise rather than enumerating through every single little group that's out there. The US political system is predominantly driven by left- and right-leaning forces. Yes, there are many in between, but the significant power base rests (unfortunately?) along one of those two sides.
Though, your nitpicking suggests I struck a nerve. That makes me happy.
"hypocritical... daughter had kid... espouses her religious beliefs. Really? Did Palin ever say she approved of her daughter's choices? How do her daughter's actions make her a hypocrite?
I'll give you that--to an extent. It was a mostly tongue in cheek comment. However, I do find it rather hypocritical that some individuals will carry on about others' lifestyles when their own are... questionable. Glass houses and all that rot.
That same SNL sketch had some very funny, nonseniscal bits that were verbatim Palin quotes.
I don't rot my brain watching SNL skits, and I might suggest you avoid doing the same.
But, whatever. More reasonable individuals would have been able to pick apart the intent of my post rather than collecting a laundry list of points they don't like.
To other readers: I have mixed feelings about Palin, and this article from the AP doesn't help. On the one hand, it seems that she's fair with her staff, but the Palin that is presented to the rest of us is different, either because of how the media presents her or because of how she presents herself. I wanted to offer some insight into how I see her, in spite of being right-wing myself, and indicate reasons why I don't really care for her in addition to the proposed solutions I offered of just ignore her.
Unfortunately, it appears that some Slashdotters dislike the woman so severely (take our AC friend who replied to me, for instance) that they almost immediately lose their marbles when it looks like someone else is vaguely coming to her defense. Sad world.
Slashdot Mirror
I wonder what it means if you happen to use all three (Firefox, Chrome, and Opera), often at the same time? Triple the IQ? Sadly, I don't think it's additive. Oh well.
On the plus side, studies such as this one give Opera users some validation. I don't like Opera, I've tried it numerous times, and it's just not a browser I'm fond of. Nevertheless, it's good to see the underdog get positive press coverage even if most of the posts here are likely to be flamebait.
Can I say "all of the above?"
Actually, I can think of a few more colorful metaphors to describe the individuals in power here in the US, but they're highly inappropriate in mixed company. I'm also not so sure they'd adequately describe how I feel about our "leadership."
I think Notch is doing what Notch wants to do more than he is attempting to appease individual groups. And you know what? That's fine by me. It's his game.
You've written a number of gripes in this thread toward Minecraft, and my immediate response is "Okay, you paid for it. If you don't like it, it's just 15 euros, so delete it and find something else." But that seems too obvious. While I can understand your frustration, it seems like a huge waste to reiterate the same disapproval over and over again: Why not spend that time writing mods to make it do something you want it to do (you might find some useful ones for Bukkit that achieve some of your goals)? Can't code and want someone else to do the work? Toss the idea out onto a forum related to Minecraft.
In fact, I would suggest that to almost anyone. Don't like something? Grab a toolkit, hack away, and make something you do like. Who knows? Someone else might take interest and join you. You could turn it into an open source project, or keep it closed and make some money off of it.
There's plenty of games I don't like, but I absolutely refuse to waste a dozen posts on Slashdot reiterating why I don't like them--that's far too dreary. I really sincerely think that you have some good points (I like Minecraft, but I generally don't bore easily either), and I suspect that if you were to put the effort into correcting what deficiencies you see either via modding Minecraft or via rolling your own game, you could very well have something good going on. Endless criticism of a game is okay, but I find that it isn't terribly productive, and considering that most people are fairly receptive to Minecraft, you're unlikely to find many allies except for the handful of very vocal anti-Minecraft types.
Not at all. I do find it hilarious that you snagged someone hook, line, and sinker.
Then again, this is Slashdot. Most people never get the jokes...
Death by a thousand copyrights!
I believe CptNerd was being sarcastic. My reasoning is because his comment alludes to a story I heard a number of years ago from a member of a pro-ranching PAC. This particular story, as it was relayed to me, goes something like the following:
At a convention or regulatory meeting of sorts, possibly for ranchers, a young environmentalist was espousing the cruelty of keeping animals in such confines. Slaughtering them was a form of murder, after all, and our passionate young friend proposed that all cattle in captivity should be freed so they can live again in the wild as nature intended. Puzzled by the economics of such actions, a rancher asked the young man, "If you free all the cattle, how do you plan on buying meat?"
Without hesitation, the environmentalist replied "At the grocery store like everyone else."
I like that!
Hahahaha! I'm glad you picked up on that. I doubt anyone else would have (except for fellow Gentoo users, that is).
I don't completely understand the whole point behind the site either. Perhaps there was some humor in comparing Gentoo users with people who buy inexpensive, often used and under-powered vehicles then promptly glue spoilers and other "bling" to them such that something which is not fast looks fast. That's about as good as I can figure it, though.
On the other hand, I can't help but think that the individual who came up with it was probably somewhat disaffected, disgruntled, jealous, or some permutation thereof and harbored a strange dislike of Gentoo due to a small subset of the community. It completely circumvents the point that a non-trivial number of Gentoo users came from a *BSD background, myself included, precisely because of Portage. I don't see similar complaints about FreeBSD's ports collection which also often requires compilation, for example.
Operating systems are like religion. Everyone has one, and the one they have is the One True Way.
I dislike it on personal preference and a whim. Happy? (There's more to it, but I don't feel like iterating endlessly over something that feels like a senseless strawman debate.)
I have an Arch install that I periodically run in a VM and discovered that Arch grows very unhappy if you don't update the mirrors list with some regularity, otherwise it appears that there are no updates to be made. Minor annoyances like that quickly turned me off from meddling with it. Of course, before you (or others) cherry pick this comment as an example, please do keep reading. I will confess my ignorance to Arch because I'm not willing to spend a lot of timing learning it.
Now, depending on how I read your post, I would suspect you're simply voicing your dislike with Gentoo and my generalize comments related to Arch. It comes off as hair splitting, which seems counter productive. The real crux of the matter is that it's simply a matter of personal preference. Portage for all its faults is similar to Ports; as I was a long time FreeBSD user, that falls into my comfort zone as something I enjoy.
Pacman is not something I enjoy. My reasons are entirely subjective and certainly unfair. But that's just how it works. That's probably not a good enough answer, but it's the best I can give you.
Aside: If I had to pick exactly one part of Gentoo that I like the most, I would probably select the network configuration. Configuring networks and network interfaces on Gentoo is vastly superior to anything else and is probably one of the most well hidden secrets of the distro.
I'd suggest not listening to the Arch-peddler you're responding to, particularly because--as you alluded to--he's somewhat trolling. :)
If you're used to Gentoo's emerge, switching to pacman feels like someone splashed acid into your eyeballs. emerge is so much nicer, and Portage is much more predictable in its behavior. Well, with the exceptions of really big changes, blocking packages, new virtual packages, and borked USE flags. Though I've never had much of a problem with actually fixing those issues, and I suspect most die-hard Gentoo users wouldn't either.
Now, I do have to confess that Arch is at least appealing. For instance, Arch does have yaourt which makes user repositories a bit easier to handle than they would seem at first blush, and there's a few other tools I can't think of at the moment that simplify package management. Still, I like the way Portage overlays work; plus Portage has the advantage that it works more like FreeBSD's ports (the whole reason I wound up using Gentoo in the first place!). More importantly, the Gentoo mailing list just seems friendlier. Maybe not as much as the FreeBSD list, but you get the idea. Arch users are just plain weird. :)
So no, while you're joking about Gentoo letting you be "elitist and pretentious" (sadly, I don't think many people will get the joke related to that one site involving rice), I think it's more a matter of pragmatism. Pacman seems horribly convoluted to anyone coming from a ports/portage background. Now, that's not to say that Gentoo/Portage mixed with a binary rolling release system wouldn't be amazing. Wasn't there a project attempted along those lines? (Sabayon? Although I think that has Portage plus another package manager.)
I hate to undo some of the moderation I've done in this thread, but it's only +1, Funny mods. So it's not like I'm hurting anyone's karma. I do want to share some personal experience with you before you (potentially) make a purchase now or in the future.
First, I have to agree: Klipsch produces some amazing speakers. The sound quality is outstanding. However, the design of their integrated electronics for the consumer-grade hardware is absolutely terrible. I've gone through a total of about 3 sets of their ProMedia 5.1s (before they were discontinued) simply because the cooling for the MOSFETs is poorly thought out and insufficient. After about a year and a half of pretty constant use, each set suffered the same fate and stopped working. Not to mention that when (when) their personal media sets die, Klipsch will request ~$100 to replace a $2 set of parts--it's almost not worth it. If you can replace the MOSFETs yourself, you're usually OK, except in the case (like my last set) where their proprietary BASH card burned itself out--probably from me not replacing the 'FETs soon enough. Add that to the fact that Klipsch outright refuses to send just the affected component out by itself, requesting that you send the entire subwoofer back (you pay the shipping to them, they pay the return shipping)...
Side note: I have read elsewhere that others have had better luck, and that they've often modded their sets with fans and such. That's not really something I wanted to do, so YMMV.
Anyway, long story short: I eventually replaced my Klipsch speakers with some Logitech Z5500s. The satellites aren't as great as the Klipsch, but Logitech at least mounts a heatsink on the outside of the cabinet. I'm not sure if the Z5500s have been discontinued (can't seem to find them!), but if you can get your hands on a set for a reasonable price, it'd be more than worth it. If the control pod doesn't die within 3 months of ownership, the set seems to last for a good long time (I don't know how common that problem is, though I've spotted a few people with it on the Logitech forums).
On the other hand, Logitech's customer service is crap, especially compared to Klipsch, but I think I'd rather buy a $400 set of speakers that last 10+ years than having to replace a $100 component almost every year...
If you buy Klipsch's speakers proper, you're unlikely to have problems (and you'd need a separate receiver/amp/etc). I don't own any, but from what I've read related to their lower-end offerings, there's quite a few folks who seem to swear by 1) staying away from the low end and 2) buying Klipsch stand alone stuff. I admit, though: their "personal media" offerings don't quite live up to the expectations in terms of longevity that I had. The sound was incredible, though.
This is an old thread, so I doubt you'll read my post, but you have a very good point here. I was originally going to browse the comments--being unlikely to post--until I saw the AC below who made a rather rude series of remarks professing his ignorance.
Personally, I think it's true what you wrote. Mozilla (the suite) was interesting but bloated. Non-geeks were never going to use it (maybe because of MS' entrenchment, plus Outlook/Outlook Express); Firefox arguably made Mozilla (the foundation) who they are. As an anecdote, my non-techy mother when asked by a friend of hers what browser she used, she immediately quipped "Firefox." Asked about MSIE, and she replied "Ew, who uses that?" Granted, this is largely from my encouragement to my folks to stay away from IE, but I truly think it has nothing to do with the merits of the browser and everything to do with the fact that we geeks initially pushed Firefox to our non-geek friends and family. Because of our efforts, many of them have associated Firefox with security for better or worse.
Thinking back on it, I can only remember one friend of mine who used the Mozilla suite; I refused to use it because it was painfully slow on the hardware I had at the time, but the Gecko engine was something amazing. Mozilla was most assuredly not going anywhere, and in a way that was something of a shame.
It's closer to Judge Dredd, in my opinion. Although I sincerely doubt it's real.
Yeah, I don't think it's real. It looks like a belated April Fool's gag (emphasis on gag). The "shit burgers" label on the refrigerator sort of shattered the illusion for me.
I heard of more legitimate research sourcing meat substitutes from insects, and I can't help but think this is just a pun based on that. Though, it does make the bugs seem like a better alternative.
I don't specifically remember that, but it wouldn't surprise me. That said, after a cursory search, the only thing I could find was this April Fool's joke.
You know, I've never figured out how they can say that. I've never been able to hit the broad side of a barn with those stupid thumbsticks. Unless they're using something like this...
One thing I will give to Nintendo is that they certainly had their market niche locked down very well. Those of us who grew up during the eras of the NES and SNES can certainly attest to that. Sure, maybe stomping anthropomorphic evil mushrooms and turtles qualifies as violence, but I think it was far more wholesome than shooting something and the library of games available to both systems were immense.
Of course, both platforms had their shooters, but I think it is the responsibility of parents to vet what entertainment their children are consuming.
That's the first thing I thought when I was reading the summary. If he has a 6 year old, why on EARTH would he leave his kid unattended on the Interwebs?! At that age, my parents never left me unattended with so much as our C64. Of course, they may have been frightened I was going to break it...
Even as recent as the middle to late 1980s, my folks spent time with me outdoors and didn't stuff me in front of a television set. Maybe this guy needs to, you know, spend quality time with his kid rather than plunking him down for hours in front of the computer. Or better yet: sit with him!
I think the thing that worries me is that the various papers (most of which are losing readership) are pointing to this report as validation for their own decline when it's most certainly other factors--notably every single one you've mentioned.
As an example, I decided to compare both articles linked in the Slashdot summary: The LA Times article and the AP wire article. Here's the hilarious part:
Neither article discusses much, if anything, about the majority of the FCC's report. For example, nearly every quote (or maybe every quote) was lifted directly from the first page of the FCC's executive summary. No joke. Had they so much as scrolled down, they would have noticed this gem (or maybe they did and they simply don't want to admit it):
While I haven't read through the entire thing--I skimmed it--the FCC report appears to be mostly fair. I find it rather amusing though that two separate stories reported by the press on this same report lifted information from exactly one page and effectively ignored all the others. Better yet: The information they reported fits nicely into their world view (woe is me! the Internet is destroying us!), and outright failing to report the positive sides in the FCC's account. Indeed, if it were not for this same evil technology, and to a certain extent, the Internet, many of the recent stories related to police brutality may have gone unnoticed.
That the press glossed over the FCC's report is unsurprising. They have deadlines to meet, certainly, and with major outlets in a rush to beat all the other outlets, it's easy to see why they would rush out articles of questionable value without so much as reading in its entirety the same report they're reporting. Quantity before quality. Although, isn't it a little odd that the very media suffering economically is latching on to a study discussing their economic suffering and complaining loudly? Fox watching the chicken coup? News at 11.
Tough luck for them. As you pointed out, news for the lowest common denominator is news that many of us are going to have difficulty consuming because it has absolutely no redeeming value. Terrible authoring, frequent mistakes and grammatical errors, and incorrect "facts" lend one to assume that journalists have failed in their craft. For us here on Slashdot, written mistakes aren't a big deal--we're not getting paid to post comments. Journalists, however, are. Worse, when the majority cares so little about the quality of their work, it's no surprise then that their readership would decline.
Not at all. I agree. (Or maybe that makes me a nutjob, too?)
It is rather frightening the number of abuses that have been made by the very people who profess to be protecting us. There's plenty of examples that have been posted here on /. at a frequency of almost every month, so I have no need to enumerate even a modest list of two or three.
If they win and they're able to, well, "protect" officers from being recorded even in a public place, then there's almost no way to prove that any such abuses ever occur. Like the individual in this last week (or two?) who hid the flash card from his phone in his mouth while law enforcement was stomping it to bits, we'll all wind up in that position. Jack-booted to the ground, hiding some data somewhere on our person, and being threatened with life and limb all because we saw an injustice on a public street.
Actually, that line of thought is really frightening me right now. Perhaps I should stop. Or perhaps I should practice removing the card from my phone as quickly as possible...
Sorry to reply to your post twice, but I missed something: I hadn't noticed that you were the OP I responded to.
Isn't it rather humorous that you provided a far more fair response than others in spite of the fact that you were the one I was responding to (even though my verbiage was decidedly unfair)? That says a lot about the others...
Friended.
This should be modded +1, Sad Truth.
What's absurd is the magnitude of corn shifted into ethanol. I knew it was a lot, but I honestly had no idea that it was such a significant part of our production.
So what happens when we have eco-friendly biofuel but no way to eat?
Yeah, definitely. I appreciate your additions (and deserved corrections) to my complaints about the article's author and his comments. I owe you an apology for my somewhat defensive reply for reasons you undoubtedly understand. In fact, you pointed it out! There's really no excuse for my defensive behavior.
Along those lines, I appreciate your response and clarifications. I don't always post on /., and when I do it's often very regular for a period of 2 days, and then I disappear again for the exact reason that I grow gravely frustrated over the general atmosphere (particularly in the political posts).
Go figure. I wish we were isolated from those other sites that shall remain unnamed, but I'm afraid that the basic mentality common elsewhere is slowly bleeding through here, ruining otherwise good conversations. It's pathetic.
Interesting. I hadn't known that it was tested already along those lines...
Legal definitions aside, what is your opinion related to cellphones in a case like this? To me, it would seem that it shouldn't really matter if the recording of police is obvious as long as it is on public grounds. Would that be stretching the notion of "public" too far?
Interestingly, you're the only one of three replies made to my post that makes any sense, and it's quite clear that you're far more fair than the others in your distinction. I would like to thank you for that.
That's also true. I suppose I was being unfair by pointing out that particular part. Allow me to explain my reasoning:
Palin, and for that matter, a significant part of the right wing (and yes, I am a part of it as I mentioned) tends to overtly criticize the lifestyle choices of others while overlooking their own issues close to home. To that extent, I see it as something hypocritical. That's probably unfair of me, because I can't really recall any instances where Palin herself outwardly criticized someone else's family and/or children. However, the portion of our political spectrum she represents is pretty vocal along those lines, so while I'd like to suggest if fair to attach her to them in kind, maybe it's not. Thoughts?
I don't want Obama to win, so that's probably one of the points we would disagree on. However, I don't particularly want Palin to run, either. She's too vitriolic and has far too much political baggage at this point. On the other hand, I do think it's likewise very sad that the two strongest female personalities in recent political history (think Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton) have essentially been demonized for their entire careers, and it probably suggests a great deal about a certain level of sexism that exists in our political system. I don't know.
Regardless, I do wish to thank you for being extremely fair in your response to me, and it's clear that you read through and followed my points (agreement or not being moot). It's just a shame that 2/3rds of the replies I received were inflammatory and inane. Thanks again for being fair and even handed.
I don't normally reply to ACs unless they state something really stupid, even if it is a vague attempt at trolling. In this case, I think you've succeeded.
First, refer to my response to someone else with a similar sentiment. Then you can understand my intent since I believe you missed it.
For the sake of concise arguments, it's often better to boil things down to a more easily understood and digested premise rather than enumerating through every single little group that's out there. The US political system is predominantly driven by left- and right-leaning forces. Yes, there are many in between, but the significant power base rests (unfortunately?) along one of those two sides.
Though, your nitpicking suggests I struck a nerve. That makes me happy.
I'll give you that--to an extent. It was a mostly tongue in cheek comment. However, I do find it rather hypocritical that some individuals will carry on about others' lifestyles when their own are... questionable. Glass houses and all that rot.
I don't rot my brain watching SNL skits, and I might suggest you avoid doing the same.
But, whatever. More reasonable individuals would have been able to pick apart the intent of my post rather than collecting a laundry list of points they don't like.
To other readers: I have mixed feelings about Palin, and this article from the AP doesn't help. On the one hand, it seems that she's fair with her staff, but the Palin that is presented to the rest of us is different, either because of how the media presents her or because of how she presents herself. I wanted to offer some insight into how I see her, in spite of being right-wing myself, and indicate reasons why I don't really care for her in addition to the proposed solutions I offered of just ignore her.
Unfortunately, it appears that some Slashdotters dislike the woman so severely (take our AC friend who replied to me, for instance) that they almost immediately lose their marbles when it looks like someone else is vaguely coming to her defense. Sad world.