No, it was written by someone with a clue what mathematics is and how the underlying reasoning works. Pictorial reasoning is not reliable; if you try to use it because you're a ``visual learner'', you will fail.
Learning is one thing, but thinking/reasoning is another. Dijkstra's point is that, however you learn a concept, relying on graphical `reasoning' to find out new ideas/theorems is a tragically bad idea.
Re:Gnumeric is ok, but not THAT hot
on
Gnumeric Turns 5
·
· Score: 1
but come to think of it, i did "source ~/.profile", when like you say, i should be POSIX compliant and do a ". ~/.profile" because the SUN/bin/sh is a POSIX shell, not bash. hmm... sam goes off to remove the giggery pokery form his recursive setup...
Glad to be of service.
Re:Gnumeric is ok, but not THAT hot
on
Gnumeric Turns 5
·
· Score: 1
Ah, right. I was of course remembering that I knew I was successful in add #!/bin/bash -l to my gnome session script on my desktop---but I have root, of course. I didn't think about the poor non-roots out there.
Btw., would it work to say `. ~/.bash_profile' or some such in your.xsession? I wonder...
Re:Gnumeric is ok, but not THAT hot
on
Gnumeric Turns 5
·
· Score: 1
unless you make your.xsession a login shell of course, which involves some jiggery-pokery;-)
I don't think so---it should work just to make the #! line say #!/bin/bash -l.
3) what scripting capabilities we do have (eg in python, perl, or guile) are strictly sandboxed. We are definitely tending to err on the side of caution rather than functionality.
Could you point me to some technical docs on how this works? I'm very curious about such things. Thanks.
We're outraged when the GPL is violated because a violation of the GPL constitutes an attempt to impose some of that IP we're so fond of violating. Duh.
That's the point here---even if you oppose copying/redistributing DVDs, there are plenty of good reasons to use DeCSS. So, even if you think software for copying/redistributing DVDs should be illegal, DeCSS shouldn't.
Sure a lot of the OSS developers write proprietary code, but most proprietary developers don't write OSS code. OSS developers can write proprietary code and still be drawn from the top notches of proprietary developers---i.e., all OSS is written by the people who write the very best proprietary code.
I doubt this is a factor long run, and you're forgetting that they are a different company, with different desires. Long term (remember that idea?), they'd probably end up spending as much to develop the software as your employers will.
B)WHat about movies that may only have 1 scene that is 'offensive' and is pretty much gratuitous?
Right. A lot of movies try for the more `adult' rating (e.g. R over PG-13) to get the 20-something guy audience, even when it adds nothing to the story. Well, I have no problem with that, but I'd rather watch the lower-rated version, personally.
Slashdot Mirror
No, you don't hate mathematicians---you hate mathematics. Unfortunately, I will not enjoy watching you burn in hell; I wish I could.
No, it was written by someone with a clue what mathematics is and how the underlying reasoning works. Pictorial reasoning is not reliable; if you try to use it because you're a ``visual learner'', you will fail.
Learning is one thing, but thinking/reasoning is another. Dijkstra's point is that, however you learn a concept, relying on graphical `reasoning' to find out new ideas/theorems is a tragically bad idea.
Glad to be of service.
Ah, right. I was of course remembering that I knew I was successful in add #! /bin/bash -l to my gnome session script on my desktop---but I have root, of course. I didn't think about the poor non-roots out there.
.xsession? I wonder...
Btw., would it work to say `. ~/.bash_profile' or some such in your
I don't think so---it should work just to make the #! line say #!
Could you point me to some technical docs on how this works? I'm very curious about such things. Thanks.
Btw: turn my computer off? And wreck my glorious uptime? Are you kidding?
Which is what makes us techies so much better than y'all.
You fucking idito!!!
It's not BSD. In fact, it's even more restrictive than GPL.
The computer is the property of whoever owns it, regadless of whether there's unauthorized software on the HD.
Not IT's paranoia; the movie industry's paranoia.
We're outraged when the GPL is violated because a violation of the GPL constitutes an attempt to impose some of that IP we're so fond of violating. Duh.
That's the point here---even if you oppose copying/redistributing DVDs, there are plenty of good reasons to use DeCSS. So, even if you think software for copying/redistributing DVDs should be illegal, DeCSS shouldn't.
Not OS. Desktop environment. (But they're not turning into one nearly fast enough.)
Sure a lot of the OSS developers write proprietary code, but most proprietary developers don't write OSS code. OSS developers can write proprietary code and still be drawn from the top notches of proprietary developers---i.e., all OSS is written by the people who write the very best proprietary code.
Mod parent Informative.
I think my sig agrees with your sig.
Actually, true Marxist communism involves a government getting bigger and bigger and bigger until it disappears.
Reason 1 Marx was an idiot.
I doubt this is a factor long run, and you're forgetting that they are a different company, with different desires. Long term (remember that idea?), they'd probably end up spending as much to develop the software as your employers will.
That's why you don't have software developed by the same people who distribute it. Duh.
Anyway, we do have another revenue stream: idiots. Same as M$'s.
Why not? What do your clients stand to lose?
Right. A lot of movies try for the more `adult' rating (e.g. R over PG-13) to get the 20-something guy audience, even when it adds nothing to the story. Well, I have no problem with that, but I'd rather watch the lower-rated version, personally.
Fine. Don't use this software.
However: not everything you find pointless should be illegal.