The channels I hear people on Fark want: Discovery, some of the News channels, History channel, are channels that, due to their viewership, will not get many subscribers under a "a la carte" system.
So the fuck what? That's called a 'free market'; leave the hand-wringing over 'worthwhile' programming to the socialist pansies. You don't have any right to demand that programming nobody but you gives a shit about be aired, nor that other users should foot *your* bill to keep some worthless channel alive.
Get with the program, Jack. You're either a capitalist, or you're a loser. Pick.
SuSE was one of the big GNU/Linux vendors, but they were slowly declining.
I don't know where you got this from. SuSe's market share and profit margin have been increasingly steadily. They've never been in decline, and their sales numbers show that sometime in the next few years they have the potential to surpass Redhat.
Probably due to the fact that YAST makes it easy even for the clueless to install Linux.
What people tend not to understand is that Open Source gets written as a contribution to society.
What people tend not to understand is that FREE software is written as a contribution to society. Open source is written so that the customer can access the source at will.
The two are not one and the same thing, although the free software loons often confuse the two.
Sometimes it's a question of which is the greater evil: allowing some measure of piracy through p2p networks, or enacting draconian privacy-violating laws in a (futile) attempt to shut down those networks altogether?
The greater evil here is rather obvious, at least to those of us who still hold on to the hope that at least some part of the Constitution will survive into the 21st century.
...only if American citizens will be expedited to Australia should they violate any Australian crimes. Either it goes both ways equally or it doesn't fly at all.
U.S. citizens don't deserve 'get out of jail free cards' just because they like bombing people who don't do what they tell them to.
Most people didn't get the fact that the movies was obviously making fun of itself most of the way through. The various 'newsflashes' should've been the kicker, but apparently the average viewer was too stupid to figure this out.
Once you realize what's going on, 'Starship Trooper' is not only a damned fine movie but a witty one as well (with the possible exception of the last scene - completed jarred with the rest of the flick).
Not to mention the fact that it was very babelicious.
It makes you wonder why, for instance, companies keep huge backlogs of emails. WTF? Are you *looking* to provide people with evidence of wrong-doing? Keep the records for some preset period of time, *then destroy them*. You can't be ordered to hand over what you don't have.
This is true. The taliban were stupid. I hesitate to say evil because its an abused word. But they were awful, awful people and i'm glad there gone. I still can't say that invading afghanistan was right.
It may have been right for the Afghanis, but who's say it's right for us? Being the world's policeman seems to be a no-win situation for just about everyone but a few dick-measuring politicians and a select number of corporations. The average American, and the average American business, seem to lose in every confrontation.
I don't want to solve the world's problems, nor do I want to waste my tax dollars trying. Call me an isolationist, but it's MY paycheck we're talking about, and MY government. Trying to 'fix the world' is a futile, fucked-up business at best, and nothing more than a scam to gather political currency or profit at worst.
So Afghanistan and Iraq had evil governments. I don't dispute that. What I dispute is the idea that U.S. intervention would be of any benefit to AMERICANS. It is neither our moral duty nor our ethical obligation to 'rescue' other countries from their own stupidity. Let them rescue themselves, if they can; and if not, well then it *still* isn't our duty to do it for them.
Frankly, I don't see the point in spending my taxes to support an enormous military force in a half-assed attempt to impose the will of the few across the entire globe. So long as a country doesn't present an immediate, credible threat to the U.S. - and one that *will* be implemented if intervention doesn't occur, not just one that a bunch of hyped-up politicians say *may* be implemented - then fuck it. And neither Afghanistan nor Iraq were ever credible threats of any kind to the U.S. (and don't even think about comparing these pathetic nations to the very real danger posed by Nazi Germany).
As far as terrorists go, they're nothing more than criminals. Psychotic criminals at that. The lunatics that blew up the Twin Towers weren't any different than Timothy McVeigh, only more dramatic in demonstrating their insanity. There is no world-wide conspiracy of evil terrorists plotting and scheming at every turn to destroy the U.S.; rather just groups of crazy fucks here and there who like killing people, no different than a cult with a hard-on for murder. The conspiracies are just elements of the X-Files plucked out of the air by power-hungry politicians looking for re-election or yet another reason to take a knife to the Constitution in order to strip more rights from their subjects, er, 'constituents'.
People think that advocating the abandonment of 'Pax Americana' is somehow morally or ethically bereft. I challenge that view, and in fact contend the opposite: that wasting American money and American lives in the pursuit of 'Pax Americana' is what's morally bereft, and certainly an irresponsible abuse of the power vested by the citizenry in their elected officials.
Democracy - Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives
Not true. A democracy can easily become a dictatorship, a tyranny of the will of the majority over the minority. It'd be quite easy for a democracy to outlaw any speech it doesn't agree with, e.g., a fanatically religious democracy could outlaw any mention of atheism, or religions other than those approved of by the state, or any criticism of the state church.
This is why our Founding Fathers were quite careful not to choose democracy but rather a limited, Constitutional form of republicanism for their new nation. So that a rabid, banal majority couldn't legally seize control of the government and use it to cruelly oppress the minority.
And a pretty one. Because no matter how well-coded the virtual sex in your virtual office, it can't hold a candle to bending a real secretary over your desk during the lunch hour.
max
Re:Linux Has Travelled Far... In The Wrong Directi
on
Linus on Linux in 1994
·
· Score: 1
But, most of all, they don't make a religion out of an operating system.,
No, instead they make a god out of a little dork who became the richest man in the world by screwing everyone else. In my mind, the Linux zealots are just assholes, while the Billy-G worshippers are downright frightening.
Max
Re:Linux Has Travelled Far... In The Wrong Directi
on
Linus on Linux in 1994
·
· Score: 1
Today, the schism between these two classes is so great one views the other with hostility and mistrust. This is not how a society should evolve.
Yeah, it's practically a daily news item on how much those non-Linux-users hate and mistrust the Linux users. Practically can't get away from it. Next thing you know they'll pass a Constitutional amendment banning those geeks from getting married!
But another, better theory currenting being exploited by apple is "if we work with them, folks who want/need/have Linux can install MS, and we'll get sales we wouldn't get otherwise."
Except that your 'better theory' has never been implemented by Microsoft in practice. They uniformly use 'embrace and extend' even when they say want to work with others. Why should they suddenly change their tune when this approach has made them the most powerful software company in the world? When even a conviction in a monopoly practices lawsuit fails to impose any sort of real penalty for their behavior?
There is absolutely zero evidence that Microsoft wants to play nice with others, and a huge wealth of evidence that while it *claims* it wants to play nice it is, in reality, just working its way to the point where it can pull the rug out from under everyone and claim all the real estate for itself.
The folks working on Mono are incredibly naive, I think, to believe that this won't happen to them. But in the end it won't matter, since I seriously doubt most of us will use Mono anyway.
So what if Jesus was an actual historical figure? There's no proof that he's anything other than a schizophrenic hearing voices, or a charismatic con man, or both.
But then Christianity isn't about proof in the knowable, it's about faith in the unknowable, eh? One of the reasons many of you come off as bunch of nutbags. The fact that you demand everyone else swallow your horseshit is just icing on the cake.
Well, I use both Linux (SuSe 9.0 now) and Windows 2000 Professional. In my personal opinion SuSe 9.0 is vastly superior to Windows in every way; if I weren't so old and overweight I'd do a little dance of joy every time I booted from my Windows partition to my Linux partition on my primary machine.
Why have Windows then? For games. That's it. Windows still runs most Windows games far better than Linux does, even though WineX has done a fantastic job closing the gap. And if I'm playing a game, I sure as shit don't want to fuck around wasting my time with config options trying to get that game to work somewhat or mostly properly on Linux when I can just boot over to Windows and play it hassle-free there.
So, Windows for games, Linux for everything else. Because Windows beats Linux when it comes to games, and Linux kicks Win's ass when it comes to everything else.
And before anyone goes on about 'ease of use', get a copy of SuSe 9.0 and do an install. It's much less painful than your average Windows install.
yada yada, yet another rant by some frothing fanatic. Why don't you just scream "I suck the corporate tit!", do twenty "heil Disney's!", and get back to giving your boss his regular noon blowjob?
This is really true for all people though. If someone believes something strongly, anything you tell them, they will intrepret it as a confirmation of their beliefs.
So true. Just try talking to one of those religious nutbags, the ones that call themselves 'Christians'. Poster-children for self-delusion, they are.
...if this law were passed in America? Corporate troopers breaking down the doors, and if you resist they can just shoot your ass. Speak ill of any corporation and all of a sudden 'evidence' will be manufactured, er, provided to 'competent law enforcement agencies' that you're a copyright evil-doer.
Perhaps you'll eventually be exonerated - that is, if said 'evidence' doesn't mysteriously appear on your computer *AFTER* it's seized and hauled off to corporate headquarters - but you'll have to wait years to get back your property, your money, and recover what's left of your life.
If shit like this comes anywhere close to passing in the U.S. I'm moving to Canada.
...right after their purchases of thousands of those little X10 spy cameras that you can mount just about anywhere! Oops, said too much, gotta go before-------------
Because NASA says that it costs too much to maintain, and it's getting close to its estimated end of life date.
As reported recently in the news, this was refuted by two independent engineering teams *within NASA*. At which point NASA changed its tune and said that servicing the Hubble was too dangerous for the astronauts.
Although recently *another* leak from inside NASA claimed that repairs to the Hubble were no more dangerous than any one of the 25 planned missions to complete the space station.
There doesn't seem to be a good reason to abandon Hubble. Which makes me think that the real reason has far more to do with politics and budget appropriations than anything else.
Slashdot Mirror
The channels I hear people on Fark want: Discovery, some of the News channels, History channel, are channels that, due to their viewership, will not get many subscribers under a "a la carte" system.
So the fuck what? That's called a 'free market'; leave the hand-wringing over 'worthwhile' programming to the socialist pansies. You don't have any right to demand that programming nobody but you gives a shit about be aired, nor that other users should foot *your* bill to keep some worthless channel alive.
Get with the program, Jack. You're either a capitalist, or you're a loser. Pick.
Max
SuSE was one of the big GNU/Linux vendors, but they were slowly declining.
I don't know where you got this from. SuSe's market share and profit margin have been increasingly steadily. They've never been in decline, and their sales numbers show that sometime in the next few years they have the potential to surpass Redhat.
Probably due to the fact that YAST makes it easy even for the clueless to install Linux.
Max
What people tend not to understand is that Open Source gets written as a contribution to society.
What people tend not to understand is that FREE software is written as a contribution to society. Open source is written so that the customer can access the source at will.
The two are not one and the same thing, although the free software loons often confuse the two.
Max
Sometimes it's a question of which is the greater evil: allowing some measure of piracy through p2p networks, or enacting draconian privacy-violating laws in a (futile) attempt to shut down those networks altogether?
The greater evil here is rather obvious, at least to those of us who still hold on to the hope that at least some part of the Constitution will survive into the 21st century.
Max
...only if American citizens will be expedited to Australia should they violate any Australian crimes. Either it goes both ways equally or it doesn't fly at all.
U.S. citizens don't deserve 'get out of jail free cards' just because they like bombing people who don't do what they tell them to.
Max
Most people didn't get the fact that the movies was obviously making fun of itself most of the way through. The various 'newsflashes' should've been the kicker, but apparently the average viewer was too stupid to figure this out.
Once you realize what's going on, 'Starship Trooper' is not only a damned fine movie but a witty one as well (with the possible exception of the last scene - completed jarred with the rest of the flick).
Not to mention the fact that it was very babelicious.
Max
It makes you wonder why, for instance, companies keep huge backlogs of emails. WTF? Are you *looking* to provide people with evidence of wrong-doing? Keep the records for some preset period of time, *then destroy them*. You can't be ordered to hand over what you don't have.
Max
This is true. The taliban were stupid. I hesitate to say evil because its an abused word. But they were awful, awful people and i'm glad there gone. I still can't say that invading afghanistan was right.
It may have been right for the Afghanis, but who's say it's right for us? Being the world's policeman seems to be a no-win situation for just about everyone but a few dick-measuring politicians and a select number of corporations. The average American, and the average American business, seem to lose in every confrontation.
I don't want to solve the world's problems, nor do I want to waste my tax dollars trying. Call me an isolationist, but it's MY paycheck we're talking about, and MY government. Trying to 'fix the world' is a futile, fucked-up business at best, and nothing more than a scam to gather political currency or profit at worst.
So Afghanistan and Iraq had evil governments. I don't dispute that. What I dispute is the idea that U.S. intervention would be of any benefit to AMERICANS. It is neither our moral duty nor our ethical obligation to 'rescue' other countries from their own stupidity. Let them rescue themselves, if they can; and if not, well then it *still* isn't our duty to do it for them.
Frankly, I don't see the point in spending my taxes to support an enormous military force in a half-assed attempt to impose the will of the few across the entire globe. So long as a country doesn't present an immediate, credible threat to the U.S. - and one that *will* be implemented if intervention doesn't occur, not just one that a bunch of hyped-up politicians say *may* be implemented - then fuck it. And neither Afghanistan nor Iraq were ever credible threats of any kind to the U.S. (and don't even think about comparing these pathetic nations to the very real danger posed by Nazi Germany).
As far as terrorists go, they're nothing more than criminals. Psychotic criminals at that. The lunatics that blew up the Twin Towers weren't any different than Timothy McVeigh, only more dramatic in demonstrating their insanity. There is no world-wide conspiracy of evil terrorists plotting and scheming at every turn to destroy the U.S.; rather just groups of crazy fucks here and there who like killing people, no different than a cult with a hard-on for murder. The conspiracies are just elements of the X-Files plucked out of the air by power-hungry politicians looking for re-election or yet another reason to take a knife to the Constitution in order to strip more rights from their subjects, er, 'constituents'.
People think that advocating the abandonment of 'Pax Americana' is somehow morally or ethically bereft. I challenge that view, and in fact contend the opposite: that wasting American money and American lives in the pursuit of 'Pax Americana' is what's morally bereft, and certainly an irresponsible abuse of the power vested by the citizenry in their elected officials.
Max
Democracy - Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives
Not true. A democracy can easily become a dictatorship, a tyranny of the will of the majority over the minority. It'd be quite easy for a democracy to outlaw any speech it doesn't agree with, e.g., a fanatically religious democracy could outlaw any mention of atheism, or religions other than those approved of by the state, or any criticism of the state church.
This is why our Founding Fathers were quite careful not to choose democracy but rather a limited, Constitutional form of republicanism for their new nation. So that a rabid, banal majority couldn't legally seize control of the government and use it to cruelly oppress the minority.
Max
I think I'd recommend a good secretary
And a pretty one. Because no matter how well-coded the virtual sex in your virtual office, it can't hold a candle to bending a real secretary over your desk during the lunch hour.
max
But, most of all, they don't make a religion out of an operating system.,
No, instead they make a god out of a little dork who became the richest man in the world by screwing everyone else. In my mind, the Linux zealots are just assholes, while the Billy-G worshippers are downright frightening.
Max
Today, the schism between these two classes is so great one views the other with hostility and mistrust. This is not how a society should evolve.
Yeah, it's practically a daily news item on how much those non-Linux-users hate and mistrust the Linux users. Practically can't get away from it. Next thing you know they'll pass a Constitutional amendment banning those geeks from getting married!
Time to put on the tinfoil hat.
Max
Fine, but then don't complain when companies don't take Linux seriously and instead view it as an amateur, volunteer, hacker effort only.
God knows, all the fucking profanity sure has deterred IBM from using Linux.
Max
But without Linus, the Linux kernel would not be as amazingly great as it is today.
Without Linus, there *would be no Linux kernel*.
Max
...so I'm supposed to move to fucking India to get a job...with an American company?
Max
...a hard drive big enough to hold all of my porn! Woohoo!
Max
But another, better theory currenting being exploited by apple is "if we work with them, folks who want/need/have Linux can install MS, and we'll get sales we wouldn't get otherwise."
Except that your 'better theory' has never been implemented by Microsoft in practice. They uniformly use 'embrace and extend' even when they say want to work with others. Why should they suddenly change their tune when this approach has made them the most powerful software company in the world? When even a conviction in a monopoly practices lawsuit fails to impose any sort of real penalty for their behavior?
There is absolutely zero evidence that Microsoft wants to play nice with others, and a huge wealth of evidence that while it *claims* it wants to play nice it is, in reality, just working its way to the point where it can pull the rug out from under everyone and claim all the real estate for itself.
The folks working on Mono are incredibly naive, I think, to believe that this won't happen to them. But in the end it won't matter, since I seriously doubt most of us will use Mono anyway.
Max
So what if Jesus was an actual historical figure? There's no proof that he's anything other than a schizophrenic hearing voices, or a charismatic con man, or both.
But then Christianity isn't about proof in the knowable, it's about faith in the unknowable, eh? One of the reasons many of you come off as bunch of nutbags. The fact that you demand everyone else swallow your horseshit is just icing on the cake.
Max
Well, I use both Linux (SuSe 9.0 now) and Windows 2000 Professional. In my personal opinion SuSe 9.0 is vastly superior to Windows in every way; if I weren't so old and overweight I'd do a little dance of joy every time I booted from my Windows partition to my Linux partition on my primary machine.
Why have Windows then? For games. That's it. Windows still runs most Windows games far better than Linux does, even though WineX has done a fantastic job closing the gap. And if I'm playing a game, I sure as shit don't want to fuck around wasting my time with config options trying to get that game to work somewhat or mostly properly on Linux when I can just boot over to Windows and play it hassle-free there.
So, Windows for games, Linux for everything else. Because Windows beats Linux when it comes to games, and Linux kicks Win's ass when it comes to everything else.
And before anyone goes on about 'ease of use', get a copy of SuSe 9.0 and do an install. It's much less painful than your average Windows install.
Max
yada yada, yet another rant by some frothing fanatic. Why don't you just scream "I suck the corporate tit!", do twenty "heil Disney's!", and get back to giving your boss his regular noon blowjob?
Max
This is really true for all people though. If someone believes something strongly, anything you tell them, they will intrepret it as a confirmation of their beliefs.
So true. Just try talking to one of those religious nutbags, the ones that call themselves 'Christians'. Poster-children for self-delusion, they are.
Max
...if this law were passed in America? Corporate troopers breaking down the doors, and if you resist they can just shoot your ass. Speak ill of any corporation and all of a sudden 'evidence' will be manufactured, er, provided to 'competent law enforcement agencies' that you're a copyright evil-doer.
Perhaps you'll eventually be exonerated - that is, if said 'evidence' doesn't mysteriously appear on your computer *AFTER* it's seized and hauled off to corporate headquarters - but you'll have to wait years to get back your property, your money, and recover what's left of your life.
If shit like this comes anywhere close to passing in the U.S. I'm moving to Canada.
Max
...right after their purchases of thousands of those little X10 spy cameras that you can mount just about anywhere! Oops, said too much, gotta go before-------------
Because NASA says that it costs too much to maintain, and it's getting close to its estimated end of life date.
As reported recently in the news, this was refuted by two independent engineering teams *within NASA*. At which point NASA changed its tune and said that servicing the Hubble was too dangerous for the astronauts.
Although recently *another* leak from inside NASA claimed that repairs to the Hubble were no more dangerous than any one of the 25 planned missions to complete the space station.
There doesn't seem to be a good reason to abandon Hubble. Which makes me think that the real reason has far more to do with politics and budget appropriations than anything else.
Max
The bulk of computer game buyers and players are over the age of 25. The idea that the market is dominated by kids is nothing more than urban myth.
Max