How do you register to be an independant? Who would you register with?
Re:have you tried any of them extensions...
on
FTP Client For Firefox
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Many (most?) Firefox extensions work with Epiphany too... though that isn't widely known. I personally use flashblock instead of adblock, but whatever works best for you.;-) As for the google bar, I find the one that comes default in firefox works fine for me, and in Epiphany I just drag a google query bookmark (with %s where the query would go) to give me the ability to do a good search at any time.
I have tried FireFox recently... 1.0PR on both Windows and Ubuntu Linux. It's a good browser -- I'm not knocking it at all -- just that I like Epiphany more and don't see any good reason to switch away from it.
I'm perfectly happy with Epiphany, thank you very much. Though Firefox is very nice too, I just prefer the Gnome integration that Epiphany has and don't need any of the features that Firefox has over Epiphany.
The fact is, there is a McDonalds and a Burger King just a few blocks from my house in Vancouver where I can get their version of poutine any time I want. I have tasted both before, and it is very subpar. Fast food chain joint employees don't have any pride in their work (and why would they for such low pay) and the food is generally of poor quality. Even if you want a burger and fries, a fast food chain is a poor choice to get it unless you are on the run or have little money.
In Quebec, poutine is a more popular dish and is available in more places that just the McCrapFood places. Plus I wasn't in a rush, and I wanted to experience something local -- much of the part of traveling. McDonalds is not a local place, nor is Burger King or the others, and would serve pretty much the same crappy food I would anywhere else. So yes, a local establishment would be much preferred by me, even if it was also a place that specialized in fast food.
To answer your question directly, in Paris and I wanted burger and fries I'd go to "Quick", which at least gives me a different experience than I would at the local McDonalds. And don't lecture me on how each country has a local style for their McDondalds... (A) I've heard it all before; and (B) it's hardly true, they are all basically the same.
Yeah. As I replied to another poster, I didn't want fast food poutine because I can get that at home here in BC. You don't fly to Paris and go to McDonalds to try the local cuisine, why would I do that in Montreal? But I guess I was technically misrepresenting the truth.... if you count fast food places there are plenty of them in Montreal that any idiot could find -- even me. =)
Yeah, I didn't want to go to a McDonalds because I could get that anywhere -- all the local ones in BC have poutine also. I wanted the real stuff, not McPoutine.;-) I walked up and down Rue St. Catherine and checked out every non-fast-food place that didn't look ultra fancy... and it took me a long time to find the poutine. I did find it though.
You can find poutine in almost any place that sells food in Quebec.
You'd think so, but not quite. I actually had a hard time finding poutine in downtown Montreal when I was last there -- had to check a half dozen restaurants before I found it. It's easier to find it in Vancouver BC, just a few blocks from my house and oh so tasty. =)
Jebus, you'd think they could apply the "less is more" concept to their advertising on that site. I could barely find the article through all the blinky and flashy ads, and the textads, and the banner ads, etc. I realize they need to make money off ads but that is plain overkill... an argument that parallels the one the article tries to make.
Furthermore, How will you deal with our budget deficit and reform the GOP's relentless tax cuts and the Democratic Party's exorbanent spending?
Don't you mean "the GOP's relentless tax cuts and exorbanent spending"? The Republicans control the house, senate, and executive -- Democrats aren't spending a pretty penny at the federal level these days.
Look at the figures provided by the congressional budget office: specifically, the outlays as a ratio to GDP. You'll see that Clinton inherited a ratio of about 22.2-22.3, and in his eight years brought that down to 18.6-18.4, the lowest level since 1966. That means that government spending relative to the size the economy was nearly at at 40 year low -- how's that for exorbatant Democratic spending?
Oh yes, that number is on the rise again, as soon as the GOP got a stranglehold on power. Government is growing rapidly under the watch of the "small government" Republicans. Just because they expouse rhetoric doesn't make it true, the facts show that Republicans are worse at creating "Big Government" than the Democrats are.
The "natural" value of the land that Ducks Unlimited purchased was limited because of government regulations. You probably couldn't have purchased that land to do oil drilling or pave it over for a parking lot or industrial complex. Thus Ducks Unlimited had an "unfair" advantage, because they could derive more legal value from the land than could the corporations.
Absent government regulations, as the libertarians propose, non-profit groups couldn't stand a chance in the bidding for most land.
I'm not blaming Dems or Repubs, they're both at fault here.
Er, don't you mean that you blame Democracts *and* Republicans, because they are both at fault? Just being equally as bad as your neighbour doesn't make you any less guilty. And yes, that's "neighbour" becuase if you're going to come up here to Canada you'd best learn to spell right.;-)
Exactly. I have been wanting something like this for a long time now, but the hypercommercialized debian-based distros like Lindows and Xandros dropped the soap big time -- just didn't fit what I wanted. So I'm stuck as a sort-of-happy fedora user, and then all of a sudden two interesting projects pop in out of the blue, aimed at people who want the best of Debian and Gnome.
I've tried both UserLinux and Ubuntu, and so far Ubuntu seems a bit more promising to me. The Gnome 2.8 is darn purdy, and they've done some nice customizations to it also.
It's more "been kept really quiet" rather than "come out of nowhere". They annouced that *something* was going to be coming, and we had a rough idea of who was doing it for quite some time now. They've just held back the details from the masses until they had this preview.
It's quite a nice distro already, with a lot of promise. I'm going to be using it for my primary system to give it a fair shot.
Actually, when installing another OS I came across other problems -- turns out my CPU was overheating. With a fan blowing on my case and underclocking my processor, it installed fine. My bad.
Actually, when installing another OS I came across other problems -- turns out my CPU was overheating. With a fan blowing on my case and underclocking my processor, it installed fine. My bad.
As I'm both a big fan of the Debian project and a Gnome user, I was really looking forward to trying UserLinux. After the announced their beta I decided to finally give it a test run. I have to say that their installer is embarrassingly broken. I've run Debian Woody, Debian Sid, SuSE 9.1, and Fedora Core 1-2 on my desktop and have never run into any problems with it. But the UserLinux installer refused to install to my existing partitions (simple ext3) and only "installed when I gave it the entire disk. Even then, I say "installed" because there were massive broken dependencies and error upon error.
I would have reported this to them, but you have to subscribe to a mailing list first just to file bug reports. Uh, okay maybe not. I'm still hoping that they put out a usable distro -- maybe when Debian Sarge stabilizes they will be able to put out a more stable installer. Until then it's just not good enough to bother.
With both Gentoo and especially debian, the package lists are very long. This means you don't have to mix-n-match repositories very much, I generally just need to add one for mplayer/dvd tools and that is it. If you use the stable version, Debian will always resolve the dependencies for you, and it will work with the Debian system. So while I might not be a good judge of package quality, I know what works for me when all I care about is having an installed application when I want to do that.
Using Fedora, there are many important packages that are not in any of the official repositories, so you have to add a bunch of them to get what you want. However these repositories often clash with each other, and usually you have to remove them from your sources.list or yum.conf and just install the 3rd party rpms by hand. But when you do this, often the applications just don't work at all.
So maybe "consistently high quality" isn't the correct term after all. I just mean that Debian packages usually work with each other in a way that you just can't expect other distributions to work. To be fair, the few packages that are in the official Fedora and semi-offical fedora.us repositories tend to work amazing, again from my limited end-user perspective. But with the limited selection you end up being forced to mix those with packages that end up sucking pretty bad, usually enough so that I end up compiling from source what I can't get from the official/semiofficial sources.
You remind me of quote from a simpsons episode: "Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos". Seriously dude, if the two leading candidates fucking suck this harshly, vote for someone else. Since you seem to be of a republican mindset, write in a vote for some reasonable candidate. Like John McCain, I know he's an upstanding dude even if I don't fully agree with everything he stands for.
There are two advantages to this: when the seriously bad decisions are made, you are not responsible because you didn't help that person into power. Secondly, you send the message that you are a republican but aren't satisfied with your choices -- hopefully they would nominate a better candidate next time. You don't *HAVE* to vote for Kang, or even for Nader.
Exactly -- the joy of using debian's apt is not just the packaging system but also the quality and depth of the packages. I'm no debian zealot -- while I do use debian for some of my systems I'm actually using FC2 right now on my primary desktop -- but the total experience of apt on Fedora or SuSE is just not comparable to the experience on Debian.
How can Nader think they are equal? I mean, Kerry isn't for the Iraq war... ah nevermind, I just remembered he said he would have gone into Iraq even knowing everything we do now. But Kerry isn't behind the PATRIOT Act and the retraction of US civil liberties... ah right, forgot about the "him helping to write it" part. Well, at least Kerry is going to roll back the tax cuts to roll back Bush's deficit... ah, he's going to spend that is he?
But seriously, there are huge differences between them. They are beholden to different megacorporate interests, and have a different way of speaking funny. How can *anyone* think such radically different candidates doesn't present adequate choice? Ignorant bastards.
I think it's awesome, and of course they have to start with the smaller papers. My point was, and is, that the slashdot headline was completely false. Fin.
Slashdot Mirror
How do you register to be an independant? Who would you register with?
Many (most?) Firefox extensions work with Epiphany too... though that isn't widely known. I personally use flashblock instead of adblock, but whatever works best for you. ;-) As for the google bar, I find the one that comes default in firefox works fine for me, and in Epiphany I just drag a google query bookmark (with %s where the query would go) to give me the ability to do a good search at any time.
I have tried FireFox recently... 1.0PR on both Windows and Ubuntu Linux. It's a good browser -- I'm not knocking it at all -- just that I like Epiphany more and don't see any good reason to switch away from it.
I'm perfectly happy with Epiphany, thank you very much. Though Firefox is very nice too, I just prefer the Gnome integration that Epiphany has and don't need any of the features that Firefox has over Epiphany.
Then we agree 100%
The fact is, there is a McDonalds and a Burger King just a few blocks from my house in Vancouver where I can get their version of poutine any time I want. I have tasted both before, and it is very subpar. Fast food chain joint employees don't have any pride in their work (and why would they for such low pay) and the food is generally of poor quality. Even if you want a burger and fries, a fast food chain is a poor choice to get it unless you are on the run or have little money.
In Quebec, poutine is a more popular dish and is available in more places that just the McCrapFood places. Plus I wasn't in a rush, and I wanted to experience something local -- much of the part of traveling. McDonalds is not a local place, nor is Burger King or the others, and would serve pretty much the same crappy food I would anywhere else. So yes, a local establishment would be much preferred by me, even if it was also a place that specialized in fast food.
To answer your question directly, in Paris and I wanted burger and fries I'd go to "Quick", which at least gives me a different experience than I would at the local McDonalds. And don't lecture me on how each country has a local style for their McDondalds... (A) I've heard it all before; and (B) it's hardly true, they are all basically the same.
Yeah. As I replied to another poster, I didn't want fast food poutine because I can get that at home here in BC. You don't fly to Paris and go to McDonalds to try the local cuisine, why would I do that in Montreal? But I guess I was technically misrepresenting the truth.... if you count fast food places there are plenty of them in Montreal that any idiot could find -- even me. =)
Yeah, I didn't want to go to a McDonalds because I could get that anywhere -- all the local ones in BC have poutine also. I wanted the real stuff, not McPoutine. ;-) I walked up and down Rue St. Catherine and checked out every non-fast-food place that didn't look ultra fancy... and it took me a long time to find the poutine. I did find it though.
You can find poutine in almost any place that sells food in Quebec.
You'd think so, but not quite. I actually had a hard time finding poutine in downtown Montreal when I was last there -- had to check a half dozen restaurants before I found it. It's easier to find it in Vancouver BC, just a few blocks from my house and oh so tasty. =)
(this new local.google.ca rocks)
Jebus, you'd think they could apply the "less is more" concept to their advertising on that site. I could barely find the article through all the blinky and flashy ads, and the textads, and the banner ads, etc. I realize they need to make money off ads but that is plain overkill... an argument that parallels the one the article tries to make.
(yes, I know how to block them)
Furthermore, How will you deal with our budget deficit and reform the GOP's relentless tax cuts and the Democratic Party's exorbanent spending?
Don't you mean "the GOP's relentless tax cuts and exorbanent spending"? The Republicans control the house, senate, and executive -- Democrats aren't spending a pretty penny at the federal level these days.
Look at the figures provided by the congressional budget office: specifically, the outlays as a ratio to GDP. You'll see that Clinton inherited a ratio of about 22.2-22.3, and in his eight years brought that down to 18.6-18.4, the lowest level since 1966. That means that government spending relative to the size the economy was nearly at at 40 year low -- how's that for exorbatant Democratic spending?
Oh yes, that number is on the rise again, as soon as the GOP got a stranglehold on power. Government is growing rapidly under the watch of the "small government" Republicans. Just because they expouse rhetoric doesn't make it true, the facts show that Republicans are worse at creating "Big Government" than the Democrats are.
Yes, you are correct.
Uh, your reality needs a shake.
The "natural" value of the land that Ducks Unlimited purchased was limited because of government regulations. You probably couldn't have purchased that land to do oil drilling or pave it over for a parking lot or industrial complex. Thus Ducks Unlimited had an "unfair" advantage, because they could derive more legal value from the land than could the corporations.
Absent government regulations, as the libertarians propose, non-profit groups couldn't stand a chance in the bidding for most land.
I'm not blaming Dems or Repubs, they're both at fault here.
;-)
Er, don't you mean that you blame Democracts *and* Republicans, because they are both at fault? Just being equally as bad as your neighbour doesn't make you any less guilty. And yes, that's "neighbour" becuase if you're going to come up here to Canada you'd best learn to spell right.
Exactly. I have been wanting something like this for a long time now, but the hypercommercialized debian-based distros like Lindows and Xandros dropped the soap big time -- just didn't fit what I wanted. So I'm stuck as a sort-of-happy fedora user, and then all of a sudden two interesting projects pop in out of the blue, aimed at people who want the best of Debian and Gnome.
I've tried both UserLinux and Ubuntu, and so far Ubuntu seems a bit more promising to me. The Gnome 2.8 is darn purdy, and they've done some nice customizations to it also.
It's more "been kept really quiet" rather than "come out of nowhere". They annouced that *something* was going to be coming, and we had a rough idea of who was doing it for quite some time now. They've just held back the details from the masses until they had this preview.
It's quite a nice distro already, with a lot of promise. I'm going to be using it for my primary system to give it a fair shot.
Actually, when installing another OS I came across other problems -- turns out my CPU was overheating. With a fan blowing on my case and underclocking my processor, it installed fine. My bad.
Actually, when installing another OS I came across other problems -- turns out my CPU was overheating. With a fan blowing on my case and underclocking my processor, it installed fine. My bad.
Yes. In nautilus, File->Open Location and then put in "sftp://host.domain/path/" Works fine for me, I use that all the time.
As I'm both a big fan of the Debian project and a Gnome user, I was really looking forward to trying UserLinux. After the announced their beta I decided to finally give it a test run. I have to say that their installer is embarrassingly broken. I've run Debian Woody, Debian Sid, SuSE 9.1, and Fedora Core 1-2 on my desktop and have never run into any problems with it. But the UserLinux installer refused to install to my existing partitions (simple ext3) and only "installed when I gave it the entire disk. Even then, I say "installed" because there were massive broken dependencies and error upon error.
I would have reported this to them, but you have to subscribe to a mailing list first just to file bug reports. Uh, okay maybe not. I'm still hoping that they put out a usable distro -- maybe when Debian Sarge stabilizes they will be able to put out a more stable installer. Until then it's just not good enough to bother.
With both Gentoo and especially debian, the package lists are very long. This means you don't have to mix-n-match repositories very much, I generally just need to add one for mplayer/dvd tools and that is it. If you use the stable version, Debian will always resolve the dependencies for you, and it will work with the Debian system. So while I might not be a good judge of package quality, I know what works for me when all I care about is having an installed application when I want to do that.
Using Fedora, there are many important packages that are not in any of the official repositories, so you have to add a bunch of them to get what you want. However these repositories often clash with each other, and usually you have to remove them from your sources.list or yum.conf and just install the 3rd party rpms by hand. But when you do this, often the applications just don't work at all.
So maybe "consistently high quality" isn't the correct term after all. I just mean that Debian packages usually work with each other in a way that you just can't expect other distributions to work. To be fair, the few packages that are in the official Fedora and semi-offical fedora.us repositories tend to work amazing, again from my limited end-user perspective. But with the limited selection you end up being forced to mix those with packages that end up sucking pretty bad, usually enough so that I end up compiling from source what I can't get from the official/semiofficial sources.
I hope that explains better what I meant.
You remind me of quote from a simpsons episode: "Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos". Seriously dude, if the two leading candidates fucking suck this harshly, vote for someone else. Since you seem to be of a republican mindset, write in a vote for some reasonable candidate. Like John McCain, I know he's an upstanding dude even if I don't fully agree with everything he stands for.
There are two advantages to this: when the seriously bad decisions are made, you are not responsible because you didn't help that person into power. Secondly, you send the message that you are a republican but aren't satisfied with your choices -- hopefully they would nominate a better candidate next time. You don't *HAVE* to vote for Kang, or even for Nader.
Exactly -- the joy of using debian's apt is not just the packaging system but also the quality and depth of the packages. I'm no debian zealot -- while I do use debian for some of my systems I'm actually using FC2 right now on my primary desktop -- but the total experience of apt on Fedora or SuSE is just not comparable to the experience on Debian.
How can Nader think they are equal? I mean, Kerry isn't for the Iraq war... ah nevermind, I just remembered he said he would have gone into Iraq even knowing everything we do now. But Kerry isn't behind the PATRIOT Act and the retraction of US civil liberties... ah right, forgot about the "him helping to write it" part. Well, at least Kerry is going to roll back the tax cuts to roll back Bush's deficit... ah, he's going to spend that is he?
But seriously, there are huge differences between them. They are beholden to different megacorporate interests, and have a different way of speaking funny. How can *anyone* think such radically different candidates doesn't present adequate choice? Ignorant bastards.
I think it's awesome, and of course they have to start with the smaller papers. My point was, and is, that the slashdot headline was completely false. Fin.
That's great! Keep in mind that I was criticizing Slashdot and not you guys. =)