In a civilized country this "church" would be declared to be a criminal organization, banned, and its leaders would be prosecuted for fraud, extortion and other obviously illegal activities -- all without a need for a single complaint or a civil lawsuit because this is what police and criminal courts are for.
However in US, where people value "freedom" (the American version of "freedom" that means "you can get away with anything as long as you are rich enough"), they would rather pretend, it's all perfectly normal, and instead chase pot smokers and random Arabs.
LEDs only produce light in narrow bands of spectrum, so even if those bands are far apart, so the light looks white, the reflection from various materials may look nothing like the color seen under wide-spectrum source such as sun, incandescent or mercury vapor light.
Yes, that is a problem. "People who say they don't care what people think are usually desperate to have people think they don't care what people think." -George Carlin
George Carlin had talent. You, on the other hand, are just a pompous idiot.
And remarkably, you truly lack the self-awareness to see what a perversion of your own cause that you have become. Was it necessary to drop the F-bomb twice in your post? Do you still kiss your mother with that mouth? What is it that makes Ubuntu zealots so hateful?
Didn't you get a memo? It's OK to hate dumbasses. Really.
Seriously... If you are frustrated I can understand, but you publicly resorted to a vicious personal attack.
That's because you are Microsoft shill, idiot or both.
Your response was neither helpful nor professional.
As opposed to you, I have a job that does not involve trolling message boards, so I don't have to be "professional" while talking to you.
If I were just a casual bystander reading your post, I certainly would not want to be associated with you or the causes you support. You just came across far too mean spirited and heavy handed.
Oh, again this "list of demands Linux has to meet so we will take it seriously". Guess what? No one cares what do you think about me, other Linux users or Linux itself. No one cares how I talk to you. You spew bullshit, so you are treated like a bullshit-spewing idiot.
I'd hate to think that you were the status quo behind the Linux community, and you are not at all like I've experienced with the wonderfully helpful Mandriva community.
I can assure you, we all hate Microsoft marketdroids and fanboys.
BTW: What have you got against using the Sugar OS on the OLPC XO?
Nothing. But I prefer Ubuntu, so I have adapted Ubuntu for XO.
After all, they didn't design it for use with Ubuntu.
Do you really think, it's possible to design hardware specifically for a particular Linux distribution and not the rest of them? Unless, of course, it's specifically crippled with DRM?
Only if "complex" means "does not contain pre-made pieces for building simple programs".
Go ahead and write a C parser in C, and that will illustrate the point nicely.
Go write a parser for anything in anything. All parsers are complex.
C forces you to learn WAY too much about the guts of the computer before you can get anything done.
Yeah! By not teaching fundamentals you can reduce the total time for education by THE WHOLE TWO MONTHS! A worthy goal, indeed.
You are EXACTLY wrong about Scheme. Scheme was designed from scratch to incorporate every principle of modern programming technique while stripping away everything that is unnecessary.
When "unnecessary" includes the answer to the question, how a machine can operate on symbols.
Let's get one thing clear: I am NOT Balmer trying astroturf.
No, you are some other guy astroturfing for him, right?
Don't try to tell me that Linux is faster. It's not. Don't try to tell me that Linux can do everything that Windows can do. It can't.
I don't believe you. Now what? Can you present actual arguments without googling for "linux" "unsupported" and posting some crap about CMYK in GIMP? Or is it the best that Microsofties could come up with?
I won't tell you that Windows is just as secure, or that Windows can do everything Linux can do, as they are also lies.
No. Actually EVERYTHING you have said is a lie. What you are trying to hide by pretending to be "fair and balanced".
What I will tell you is that the software I needed is there. What I will tell you is that the hardware support I needed is there.
Hardware? Really? You are talking about hardware support ON A NETBOOK THAT WAS SPECIFICALLY MADE TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH LINUX???!!
What the fuck did you smoke before writing that?
Perhaps sometime down the road when the various flavors of Linux
There are no "various flavors of Linux". All distributions include and support the same software, however never actually using Linux you wouldn't know that.
support Pure-Edge
grants.gov provides a Citrix ICA server to access that shitty software from non-Windows systems (no one else actually uses it). Wine supports it better than Vista (see thread). Did you notice that it doesn't run on your sparkling new Vista box? That's right, you didn't because you never tried.
and CAC readers
They are supported. Of course, you didn't know that, you just assumed that a random obscure piece of hardware used by US government is unlikely to be supported. Guess what, you were wrong, and now everyone can see how little you know about something you so passionately denounce.
, I will be able to return. Otherwise you'll just have to wait at least three more years before I get out.
Your attempts to find Linux deficiencies on Google happened to be a total failure, so I don't think, you are going to "return" anywhere. Most likely you never used Linux in the first place.
What I will tell you is that the [*]ubuntites are a confusing squirming mass of trustafarians who eat their own, and find spinning cubes to be of more importance than achieving real productivity in a high pressure work environment.
What I will tell you is that the software I needed is there. What I will tell you is that the hardware support I needed is there. What I will tell you is that the [*]ubuntites are a confusing squirming mass of trustafarians who eat their own, and find spinning cubes to be of more importance than achieving real productivity in a high pressure work environment.
And here we can see your true face. You hate us. You are trying to find some way to demonstrate your supposed superiority, a way to convince (yourself or others) that your decision to always use Microsoft software is somehow justified, and your opponents are somehow deficient.
The problem is, we don't care what you think about us. You aren't convincing anyone -- us, linux users, or your supposed audience, potential netbook users. You sound like a Microsoft marketdroid, and you may or may not actually be one, however one thing is clear -- you are too stupid for us to care.
Hey look, a used car salesman got hired as a Microsoft astroturfer. Let's listen to him because he said, he can use perl.
Go, fuck yourself. (posted from OLPC XO running Ubuntu)
There are tons of/b/tards spouting all kinds of 4chan shit here. "[citation needed]" is probably the only thing that became a meme outside of Wikipedia through being mentioned in xkcd, so I don't think, it's fair to blame it.
I find it disgusting and appaling how people see introductory classes as an appropriate place for mental masturbation and lengthy sermons. Students with no previous experience have no reference points, no idea what the teacher is talking about when he describes differences between things that he believes to be best and worst practices in programming -- they have to either share the teacher's belief or dismiss it as impractical bullshit, in both cases getting superficial knowledge and no feasible way to apply or verify it.
Introductory class should first and foremost serve the purpose of providing the foundation for future study, introducing concepts, describing ideas and mechanisms that student will have to understand while studying the rest of courses related to CS, Engineering or IT. To do so, it must describe the subject of study -- purpose and application of software, basics of computer architecture, programming languages, formal logic, algorithms, data representation and data structures, languages, CS theory, various (!) approaches to software design, role of operating systems, interfaces and protocols. By the time the student has a firm grasp on those concepts and he is ready to think about applicability of procedural, object-oriented or functional programming, quality of C++, Java or Perl design, or look for a plausible excuse to use SQL, the semester is over.
Taking this into account, C is nearly perfect for most of such introduction. The language itself has a very simple syntax, so student is not distracted by learning details of some psychopath's design and implementation decisions. There is no overwhelming ideology pushed through the language except maybe simplicity and modularity. Same language can be used to illustrate workings of hardware, data structures of increasing complexity, operating systems, various approaches to programming, etc. without creating false impression of those concepts being implemented by isolated pieces of software and set in stone by wise and powerful language designers. Knowledge of C helps with learning new languages and serves as a demonstration of simple and unambiguous syntax designed for easy parsing and understanding.
Obviously the introductory course can't be a year of C and C alone -- students have to see how a different language design matches a purpose of the language -- however no other language is suitable as a proper introduction to the wide range of concepts that CS student has to understand. Least of all Java (the whole language design is a giant sermon on how some guy thinks, people should program), C++ (Frankenstein monster of programming languages), Perl (sure it's usable -- but it only makes sense if you are stoned), PHP (same but you have to be a stoned teenager) or BASIC (stoned toddler?). LISP/Scheme is good as an example of an approach that is drastically different from C, however I don't think, it works as this "foundation of all foundations" -- it's a thing in itself, so it doesn't help to get an idea how it is all tied together.
No. I am talking about situations when allocated memory may often have to live longer than objects that use it, and be shared between objects. Total opposite of RAII.
Sensibly written C++ will automatically release memory when it is no longer used.
CORRECT program will release memory when it is no longer used. If it desn't do that, especially in C++, then something is terribly wrong with it, and it should not be used until it's fixed.
However optimization is often about the very opposite of this -- avoiding freeing memory and allocating it again when exactly the same kind of object is created. Or allocating it at all -- in some situations buffers have to be allocated and accounted for using a more sophisticated mechanism than "one object -- one set of buffers" or "free the buffers when reference count reaches zero".
At least it looks like they have both source and binary ISO images (though no directories with individual packages, and English site seems to be unmaintained).
Why is it that of all major hardware vendors best support comes from _Intel_ and worst one comes from _Broadcom_? I would say, Intel has more secrets that they care about...
Except, of course, no one uses 1024x768 resolution for at least half a decade (old monitors burned out). Or runs Solitaire on Linux. Or reports bugs without mentioning actual graphics hardware.
And yet vendors end up using Installshit^Held. And yet dependencies are still not being resolved properly. And yet both vendors and Microsoft break compatibility all the time.
And yet vendors don't complain about Microsoft producing crap.
Because he is the same type of Windows fanboy that contributes nothing to either OS yet loves to proclaims lists of things Linux has to do to be "taken seriously", "be ready for desktop", "be ready for enterprise" or other similarly ridiculous things.
Except, of course, in reality the "proprietary information" is something that a competitor should never ever consider using for product development because it's worthless details of a particular (usually bad) implementation of a trivial idea. The real purposes are:
1. Break compatibility and extort money from everyone who tries to achieve it. 2. Hide embarrassing details that demonstrate low professionalism of developers or expose underperforming products.
Slashdot Mirror
n/t
INTERNET being slower?
Really?
Don't forget to get a paycheck from your "viral marketing" company, and thank you for your stupidity.
/. != /b/
Some people are forced to use Windows.
Shocking, isn't it?
In a civilized country this "church" would be declared to be a criminal organization, banned, and its leaders would be prosecuted for fraud, extortion and other obviously illegal activities -- all without a need for a single complaint or a civil lawsuit because this is what police and criminal courts are for.
However in US, where people value "freedom" (the American version of "freedom" that means "you can get away with anything as long as you are rich enough"), they would rather pretend, it's all perfectly normal, and instead chase pot smokers and random Arabs.
LEDs only produce light in narrow bands of spectrum, so even if those bands are far apart, so the light looks white, the reflection from various materials may look nothing like the color seen under wide-spectrum source such as sun, incandescent or mercury vapor light.
Yes, that is a problem.
"People who say they don't care what people think are usually desperate to have people think they don't care what people think."
-George Carlin
George Carlin had talent. You, on the other hand, are just a pompous idiot.
And remarkably, you truly lack the self-awareness to see what a perversion of your own cause that you have become. Was it necessary to drop the F-bomb twice in your post? Do you still kiss your mother with that mouth? What is it that makes Ubuntu zealots so hateful?
Didn't you get a memo? It's OK to hate dumbasses. Really.
Seriously... If you are frustrated I can understand, but you publicly resorted to a vicious personal attack.
That's because you are Microsoft shill, idiot or both.
Your response was neither helpful nor professional.
As opposed to you, I have a job that does not involve trolling message boards, so I don't have to be "professional" while talking to you.
If I were just a casual bystander reading your post, I certainly would not want to be associated with you or the causes you support. You just came across far too mean spirited and heavy handed.
Oh, again this "list of demands Linux has to meet so we will take it seriously". Guess what? No one cares what do you think about me, other Linux users or Linux itself. No one cares how I talk to you. You spew bullshit, so you are treated like a bullshit-spewing idiot.
I'd hate to think that you were the status quo behind the Linux community, and you are not at all like I've experienced with the wonderfully helpful Mandriva community.
I can assure you, we all hate Microsoft marketdroids and fanboys.
BTW: What have you got against using the Sugar OS on the OLPC XO?
Nothing. But I prefer Ubuntu, so I have adapted Ubuntu for XO.
After all, they didn't design it for use with Ubuntu.
Do you really think, it's possible to design hardware specifically for a particular Linux distribution and not the rest of them? Unless, of course, it's specifically crippled with DRM?
That's what i am using right now -- Xubuntu.
C has a horribly complex syntax.
Only if "complex" means "does not contain pre-made pieces for building simple programs".
Go ahead and write a C parser in C, and that will illustrate the point nicely.
Go write a parser for anything in anything. All parsers are complex.
C forces you to learn WAY too much about the guts of the computer before you can get anything done.
Yeah! By not teaching fundamentals you can reduce the total time for education by THE WHOLE TWO MONTHS! A worthy goal, indeed.
You are EXACTLY wrong about Scheme. Scheme was designed from scratch to incorporate every principle of modern programming technique while stripping away everything that is unnecessary.
When "unnecessary" includes the answer to the question, how a machine can operate on symbols.
Let's get one thing clear: I am NOT Balmer trying astroturf.
No, you are some other guy astroturfing for him, right?
Don't try to tell me that Linux is faster. It's not. Don't try to tell me that Linux can do everything that Windows can do. It can't.
I don't believe you. Now what? Can you present actual arguments without googling for "linux" "unsupported" and posting some crap about CMYK in GIMP? Or is it the best that Microsofties could come up with?
I won't tell you that Windows is just as secure, or that Windows can do everything Linux can do, as they are also lies.
No. Actually EVERYTHING you have said is a lie. What you are trying to hide by pretending to be "fair and balanced".
What I will tell you is that the software I needed is there.
What I will tell you is that the hardware support I needed is there.
Hardware? Really? You are talking about hardware support ON A NETBOOK THAT WAS SPECIFICALLY MADE TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH LINUX???!!
What the fuck did you smoke before writing that?
Perhaps sometime down the road when the various flavors of Linux
There are no "various flavors of Linux". All distributions include and support the same software, however never actually using Linux you wouldn't know that.
support Pure-Edge
grants.gov provides a Citrix ICA server to access that shitty software from non-Windows systems (no one else actually uses it). Wine supports it better than Vista (see thread). Did you notice that it doesn't run on your sparkling new Vista box? That's right, you didn't because you never tried.
and CAC readers
They are supported. Of course, you didn't know that, you just assumed that a random obscure piece of hardware used by US government is unlikely to be supported. Guess what, you were wrong, and now everyone can see how little you know about something you so passionately denounce.
, I will be able to return. Otherwise you'll just have to wait at least three more years before I get out.
Your attempts to find Linux deficiencies on Google happened to be a total failure, so I don't think, you are going to "return" anywhere. Most likely you never used Linux in the first place.
What I will tell you is that the [*]ubuntites are a confusing squirming mass of trustafarians who eat their own, and find spinning cubes to be of more importance than achieving real productivity in a high pressure work environment.
What I will tell you is that the software I needed is there.
What I will tell you is that the hardware support I needed is there.
What I will tell you is that the [*]ubuntites are a confusing squirming mass of trustafarians who eat their own, and find spinning cubes to be of more importance than achieving real productivity in a high pressure work environment.
And here we can see your true face. You hate us. You are trying to find some way to demonstrate your supposed superiority, a way to convince (yourself or others) that your decision to always use Microsoft software is somehow justified, and your opponents are somehow deficient.
The problem is, we don't care what you think about us. You aren't convincing anyone -- us, linux users, or your supposed audience, potential netbook users. You sound like a Microsoft marketdroid, and you may or may not actually be one, however one thing is clear -- you are too stupid for us to care.
Hey look, a used car salesman got hired as a Microsoft astroturfer. Let's listen to him because he said, he can use perl.
Go, fuck yourself. (posted from OLPC XO running Ubuntu)
Do you know who else uses CUPS?
That's right!
Apple.
There are tons of /b/tards spouting all kinds of 4chan shit here. "[citation needed]" is probably the only thing that became a meme outside of Wikipedia through being mentioned in xkcd, so I don't think, it's fair to blame it.
I find it disgusting and appaling how people see introductory classes as an appropriate place for mental masturbation and lengthy sermons. Students with no previous experience have no reference points, no idea what the teacher is talking about when he describes differences between things that he believes to be best and worst practices in programming -- they have to either share the teacher's belief or dismiss it as impractical bullshit, in both cases getting superficial knowledge and no feasible way to apply or verify it.
Introductory class should first and foremost serve the purpose of providing the foundation for future study, introducing concepts, describing ideas and mechanisms that student will have to understand while studying the rest of courses related to CS, Engineering or IT. To do so, it must describe the subject of study -- purpose and application of software, basics of computer architecture, programming languages, formal logic, algorithms, data representation and data structures, languages, CS theory, various (!) approaches to software design, role of operating systems, interfaces and protocols. By the time the student has a firm grasp on those concepts and he is ready to think about applicability of procedural, object-oriented or functional programming, quality of C++, Java or Perl design, or look for a plausible excuse to use SQL, the semester is over.
Taking this into account, C is nearly perfect for most of such introduction. The language itself has a very simple syntax, so student is not distracted by learning details of some psychopath's design and implementation decisions. There is no overwhelming ideology pushed through the language except maybe simplicity and modularity. Same language can be used to illustrate workings of hardware, data structures of increasing complexity, operating systems, various approaches to programming, etc. without creating false impression of those concepts being implemented by isolated pieces of software and set in stone by wise and powerful language designers. Knowledge of C helps with learning new languages and serves as a demonstration of simple and unambiguous syntax designed for easy parsing and understanding.
Obviously the introductory course can't be a year of C and C alone -- students have to see how a different language design matches a purpose of the language -- however no other language is suitable as a proper introduction to the wide range of concepts that CS student has to understand. Least of all Java (the whole language design is a giant sermon on how some guy thinks, people should program), C++ (Frankenstein monster of programming languages), Perl (sure it's usable -- but it only makes sense if you are stoned), PHP (same but you have to be a stoned teenager) or BASIC (stoned toddler?). LISP/Scheme is good as an example of an approach that is drastically different from C, however I don't think, it works as this "foundation of all foundations" -- it's a thing in itself, so it doesn't help to get an idea how it is all tied together.
No. I am talking about situations when allocated memory may often have to live longer than objects that use it, and be shared between objects. Total opposite of RAII.
Is it really deceptive to give the person what they think they want, regardless that it costs more?
Yes.
Next question, please.
Sensibly written C++ will automatically release memory when it is no longer used.
CORRECT program will release memory when it is no longer used. If it desn't do that, especially in C++, then something is terribly wrong with it, and it should not be used until it's fixed.
However optimization is often about the very opposite of this -- avoiding freeing memory and allocating it again when exactly the same kind of object is created. Or allocating it at all -- in some situations buffers have to be allocated and accounted for using a more sophisticated mechanism than "one object -- one set of buffers" or "free the buffers when reference count reaches zero".
Most of the top income makers aren't useless. In fact, they way they make money employees a lot of people.
lol trickle down economy.
Umm, hello?
ftp://ftp.redflag-linux.com/pub/redflag/dt6sp1/SP1/
At least it looks like they have both source and binary ISO images (though no directories with individual packages, and English site seems to be unmaintained).
And the difference is... what exactly?
Solution: fix products.
Why is it that of all major hardware vendors best support comes from _Intel_ and worst one comes from _Broadcom_? I would say, Intel has more secrets that they care about...
Except, of course, no one uses 1024x768 resolution for at least half a decade (old monitors burned out). Or runs Solitaire on Linux. Or reports bugs without mentioning actual graphics hardware.
You made that shit up.
And yet vendors end up using Installshit^Held.
And yet dependencies are still not being resolved properly.
And yet both vendors and Microsoft break compatibility all the time.
And yet vendors don't complain about Microsoft producing crap.
Someone still uses Sendmail?
And when they did, when was last time they edited sendmail.cf manually instead of generating it with m4?
Because he is the same type of Windows fanboy that contributes nothing to either OS yet loves to proclaims lists of things Linux has to do to be "taken seriously", "be ready for desktop", "be ready for enterprise" or other similarly ridiculous things.
Except, of course, in reality the "proprietary information" is something that a competitor should never ever consider using for product development because it's worthless details of a particular (usually bad) implementation of a trivial idea. The real purposes are:
1. Break compatibility and extort money from everyone who tries to achieve it.
2. Hide embarrassing details that demonstrate low professionalism of developers or expose underperforming products.