Yes, it is a good idea to tell people to F(Find)TFM so they can read it, but it is very hard to teach self-reliance. Hopefully these people will learn. You can help them along. "This is a README file. You read it."
Unless I missed something in the documentation, the Windows shell has a different command completion mechanism. You press a key combination (I think Ctrl-F is one of them) and it shows you the first completion to come to mind. You keep on pressing it until you get the one you want. On my windows box, however, there is an easy way to get all sorts of things I miss: type "bash". You have to install bash first.
The guy who wrote the article is working on a newer model. It will likely include things like hose clamps, a better pump (that's just a matter of getting a better pump, not any fault with the design), perhaps (and I would recommend this) zig-zag pieces of metal to make the water go around the block more, and various other refinements. This is an ongoing thing, not a one-time thing. And it is quite possible that you could get more than you pay for if this gets improved a lot.
Would you complain so if they gave negative reviews of everything? That's what some people do, and it seriously annoys me. I prefer this, and if Slashdot makes sme money in the process, good for them.
I would bet that a better way to fight ignorance of communism would be to find a simple way you can present it without making the reader's eyes glaze over with words like "class struggle" and "proletariat"(sp?)
It's even worse if they find a way to install without prompting the user. Not only is that a wide-open door for serious viruses, but it ABSOLUTELY removes any semblance of authorization (and I'd argue that a user blindly clicking "yes" to simply make the damned download panel go away doesn't constitute informed consent, either).
I think I have a way of doing something like this that might work: have some stupid JavaScript that will display the download panel over and over until the ser clicks "yes". I'm not sure if that's possible, but it sure would be nasty.
Hear, hear! In almost all cases that I have seen, JavaScript stuff could have been replaced with ordinary HTML and been made cleaner and easier to use. There are a few cases where client side scripting is useful, but most are just stupid abuses, like the one on this high school page that makes an annoying message appear in the bar where link destinations are normally shown.
In some cases, people are not even asked whether they want the software. It just installs on the hard drive--a particularly troublesome tactic that some have dubbed "drive-by download."
The concern about viruses is, I think, a very legitimate one. I'm just glad I use Opera, which wouldn't let them do that, I think. Other browsers (Mozilla? Konqueror?) might be just as good, but I haven't tried them.
There is something sort of like this in the kernel of one of the BSDs (OpenBSD?) that would create a sandbox, called jail. You'd have to google around for more information, though.
Amen to that. If whoever you're sending email to can't read it or is annoyed by the bloat of the HTML decorations Outlook (Express?) makes it so easy to put on emails, then what's the point of sending them?
BTW, if you want psychanalysis while reading your emails, open emacs, type C-x 2, then open gnus and doctor in the two buffers. "Tell me about your stupid imap server."
Yes, you are intoxicated. This was meant for high-level control of programs for testing purposes, unless I misread it. It was not meant to be running all the time as a sort of imitation of kernel-level sandboxes. It was to simulate conditions, test stuff, etc.
I think there was a discussion on Slashdot a while ago about how many clicks on links it takes to get from a site like disney.com to porn. It wasn't very many. Does anyone have a link?
I can explain that message. "Somebody doesn't like the US government and they wrote this to say so. 'Fuck' is a very impolite way of saying that you don't like something or someone."
That looks like a practical system. While I am neither conservative nor Christian, I agree with you--to a point. You say that parents should have the right to control their children's access to information. If my parents had done this, I probably would have been a lot different than I am now. I saw a lot of stuff, read a lot of books, looked at a lot of web sites that my parents wouldn't want me to see. And it has done good things for me. My worldview is quite different from what it once was. And I like it better this way. I just hope that other kids can do what I did and form their own opinions, not just be copies of their parents.
No, they wouldn't. Censorware programs set a double standard for deciding what to block. They will block offensive stuff that they are requested to block unless it comes from a prominent source like an online Bible or the "Family Research Council. It's still bad. Very bad.
You're right, but there is a question that I have: what the hell is wrong with porn? I really don't see anything wrong with pictures of naked people, and I definately don't think that children need to be protected from dangers that exist only in the minds of some misguided people.
Another nice loophole! IANAL, but MS might try to sue for IP rights on the code or something, although that might have something guarding against it in the GPL. And yes, I know I'm paranoid.
Or you could create a license that is sort of like the GPL, except slightly and insignificantly different. And with the preamble replaced. Call it the UNG (UNG's Not GPL, as a sort of GNU parody) license, or something like that. Make your implementation for that, if you want something very GPL-like.
I am right you are wrong, embrace it live with it, youll sleep better at night. (sig)
But I agree with you. How can you be right and I be wrong?
Nice loophole, but I think that before trying this, you will want to have a good lawyer available. MS might still try to sue you. It just seems like the sort of thing they might do.
I agree wih you, but there i one application I can think of where this would be useful: PDAs, Cell Phones, and stuff like that. You have a hard time putting in a kayboard/mouse so you use a pen. For anything else, though, this is idiocy.
In my opinion, this is a Bad Thing. I seriously don't like writing with a pencil/pen because it is slow, hideously sloppy, and it makes my hand and right arm cramp like hell. Although this will probably be well receved by people who simply don't know anything better than a writing stick and don't want to take the time to learn to use a keyboard. You don't even need to learn to touch-type to use a keyboard quickly; I upset typing teachers by typing quickly the "wrong way" and it didn't take too much time to get to this level.
If old people start using this, that's okay since they'll all be dead soon, anyway. But if young people start using it because it's easier than learning the keyboard, they will be permanently computer-crippled.
You had some nice points, but there were some things I'd debate.
-The extremist nature of Wahhibism, and its vicious ideas.
Excuse me, but what the hell is Wahhibism? Some sort of extremist religious doctrine that dictates people's private lives around a lot, or something?
...This is made worse by the obvious popularity of western culture - even as that culture insults all religions and religious ideas.
I think that this insulting of religious ideas is not too blatant--more like simly ignoring whatever religion you nominally subscribe to and doing what you feel like. Not much George Carlin-type stuff, though.
This presents a big choice: should the company release information, violating their privacy policy and losing their customers's trust and setting a bad precedent, or should they refuse, thereby making it harder to figure out why this guy died? I choose the latter option.
Obviously this guy wasn't a normal Everquest player, and there should be a lot of evidence for why he suicided sitting around in the ordinary world. I don't see any need to violate a privacy policy, which IMO should be inviolate.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, it is a good idea to tell people to F(Find)TFM so they can read it, but it is very hard to teach self-reliance. Hopefully these people will learn. You can help them along. "This is a README file. You read it."
Unless I missed something in the documentation, the Windows shell has a different command completion mechanism. You press a key combination (I think Ctrl-F is one of them) and it shows you the first completion to come to mind. You keep on pressing it until you get the one you want. On my windows box, however, there is an easy way to get all sorts of things I miss: type "bash". You have to install bash first.
They mention that they are using an unusually powerful fridge. I still agree that this probably wouldn't be practical.
The guy who wrote the article is working on a newer model. It will likely include things like hose clamps, a better pump (that's just a matter of getting a better pump, not any fault with the design), perhaps (and I would recommend this) zig-zag pieces of metal to make the water go around the block more, and various other refinements. This is an ongoing thing, not a one-time thing. And it is quite possible that you could get more than you pay for if this gets improved a lot.
Would you complain so if they gave negative reviews of everything? That's what some people do, and it seriously annoys me. I prefer this, and if Slashdot makes sme money in the process, good for them.
Curbing ignorance is worthwhile, though.
I think I have a way of doing something like this that might work: have some stupid JavaScript that will display the download panel over and over until the ser clicks "yes". I'm not sure if that's possible, but it sure would be nasty.
Hear, hear! In almost all cases that I have seen, JavaScript stuff could have been replaced with ordinary HTML and been made cleaner and easier to use. There are a few cases where client side scripting is useful, but most are just stupid abuses, like the one on this high school page that makes an annoying message appear in the bar where link destinations are normally shown.
In some cases, people are not even asked whether they want the software. It just installs on the hard drive--a particularly troublesome tactic that some have dubbed "drive-by download."
The concern about viruses is, I think, a very legitimate one. I'm just glad I use Opera, which wouldn't let them do that, I think. Other browsers (Mozilla? Konqueror?) might be just as good, but I haven't tried them.
There is something sort of like this in the kernel of one of the BSDs (OpenBSD?) that would create a sandbox, called jail. You'd have to google around for more information, though.
BTW, if you want psychanalysis while reading your emails, open emacs, type C-x 2, then open gnus and doctor in the two buffers. "Tell me about your stupid imap server."
Yes, you are intoxicated. This was meant for high-level control of programs for testing purposes, unless I misread it. It was not meant to be running all the time as a sort of imitation of kernel-level sandboxes. It was to simulate conditions, test stuff, etc.
I think there was a discussion on Slashdot a while ago about how many clicks on links it takes to get from a site like disney.com to porn. It wasn't very many. Does anyone have a link?
Really, what is wrong with it?
That looks like a practical system. While I am neither conservative nor Christian, I agree with you--to a point. You say that parents should have the right to control their children's access to information. If my parents had done this, I probably would have been a lot different than I am now. I saw a lot of stuff, read a lot of books, looked at a lot of web sites that my parents wouldn't want me to see. And it has done good things for me. My worldview is quite different from what it once was. And I like it better this way. I just hope that other kids can do what I did and form their own opinions, not just be copies of their parents.
No, they wouldn't. Censorware programs set a double standard for deciding what to block. They will block offensive stuff that they are requested to block unless it comes from a prominent source like an online Bible or the "Family Research Council. It's still bad. Very bad.
You're right, but there is a question that I have: what the hell is wrong with porn? I really don't see anything wrong with pictures of naked people, and I definately don't think that children need to be protected from dangers that exist only in the minds of some misguided people.
Another nice loophole! IANAL, but MS might try to sue for IP rights on the code or something, although that might have something guarding against it in the GPL. And yes, I know I'm paranoid.
I am right you are wrong, embrace it live with it, youll sleep better at night. (sig)
But I agree with you. How can you be right and I be wrong?
Nice loophole, but I think that before trying this, you will want to have a good lawyer available. MS might still try to sue you. It just seems like the sort of thing they might do.
I agree wih you, but there i one application I can think of where this would be useful: PDAs, Cell Phones, and stuff like that. You have a hard time putting in a kayboard/mouse so you use a pen. For anything else, though, this is idiocy.
If old people start using this, that's okay since they'll all be dead soon, anyway. But if young people start using it because it's easier than learning the keyboard, they will be permanently computer-crippled.
-The extremist nature of Wahhibism, and its vicious ideas.
Excuse me, but what the hell is Wahhibism? Some sort of extremist religious doctrine that dictates people's private lives around a lot, or something?
I think that this insulting of religious ideas is not too blatant--more like simly ignoring whatever religion you nominally subscribe to and doing what you feel like. Not much George Carlin-type stuff, though.
Obviously this guy wasn't a normal Everquest player, and there should be a lot of evidence for why he suicided sitting around in the ordinary world. I don't see any need to violate a privacy policy, which IMO should be inviolate.
But most of us have heard of those things. Even if we didn't know about them in ordinary ways, we've seen them on Jonny Quest cartoons! (seriously)