Re:The decision is obvious, different buyers targe
on
Is It OK To Sucks?
·
· Score: 1
Is "Póg mo th-On" a standard phrase, or a translation of the French?
Re:The decision is obvious, different buyers targe
on
Is It OK To Sucks?
·
· Score: 1
those limeys ain't got no friggin' business in Eire.
sigh. Another person who thinks the troubles would be solved by a united Ireland. There are very few English people living in Northern Ireland; however, 60% of the NI population are unionists and want NI to remain part of Britain. So if the Republic of Ireland owned Northern Ireland, the problem would still be just as bad.
Hopefully one day people will be past caring and the two communities can integrate. Tiocfaidh an là, to steal a phrase.
Re:You're right, but you're being a jackass.
on
Is It OK To Sucks?
·
· Score: 1
the fact that it could be supporting the IRA is a point in its favor.
I don't think Guinness does support the IRA. However, I don't think it would be a point in their favour if they did. The IRA isn't about republicanism any more, it's just about terrorism and gang warfare. If you wish to support the Irish republican cause, may I suggest donating to the SDLP instead, as they won't ever blow innocent civilians up. As far as the Northern Ireland question, I don't think the British government could care less, it would happily hand NI to the Republic of Ireland if it would solve the problem (which it wouldn't - a majority of NI residents are unionist).
[This may be slightly OT: moderate me down then. I'm on 100 Karma, but dropping below that will be no big deal. The real big deal will be when I drop below 0x40]
Honestly, I have not seen few situations in which a domain name holder should have one. [...] the domain holder did not even bother to challenge the complain.
I take your point about people not challenging complaints, but surely you don't think that a www.guinnesssucks.com is cybersquatting if it complains about guinness? I'd've thought that was a legitimate use for that name.
Does this smell slightly political? Posting in high quality VOB format when a smaller/lower quality compression would clearly be more appropriate
Isn't DVD basically uncompressed?
all these nice open source hippies use DVD video to freely distribute their videos!
But the list of free video compression formats is very small - non-existent? - so they probably didn't have much choice (given that RMS ain't gonna use something non-free like MPEG).
However, do you really want to be a second-rate netizen just like in the browser-wars? That's what you get for not creating and following fully open standards.
Yeah, I quite agree. I was just wondering from a technical perspective cos I don't know much about.NET. I certainly hope it doesn't take off, from the sound of how non-open it is.
You know, it seems like there are a lot of reasons you OUGHT to be using Windows. So why aren't you? [...] In this case, it isn't about Microsoft being a monopoly. It's about Microsoft having added value for YOUR country, and having addressed a market that no one else cares about.
Bullshit. It's about Microsoft having created a proprietory Hebrew character set (windows 1255) when there were already open standards available (iso-8859-8). One reason he can't read Hebrew text with Netscape is because everyone is using the Windows character set, and not unicode or iso-8859-8.
There's no end to the bad things that can be said about Microsoft. Poor internationalization isn't one of them.
That may be true for Hebrew. In 1998, Microsoft refused to translate Windows into Icelandic, even when the Icelandic government offered to pay. They only relented after a lot of bad publicity and threats of legislation from the Icelandic government.
Icelandic is a language with a quarter of a million speakers and a national government on its side. If they have difficulty negotiating with Microsoft, then what hope is there for the 90% of languages with less speakers and no government support?
Sorry to argue with your point, which you may have only meant to apply to Hebrew, but this is one place where I think non-free software can be really bad. Even if companies offer some support for a language in one version of a product, there's no guarantee that they'll continue supporting that language in future. Minority language speakers are left in a state of precarious dependence. On the other hand, free software can offer the chance to have sustainable support for a language, as long as there's a single fluent speaker willing to put in the time.
Are you familiar with catdoc and xls2csv? I don't know how well they cope with text that is non-(8859-1) and non-unicode, though. As to the proprietory character set thing, the answer in the long run is unicode, but meanwhile mozilla 0.7 claims to have some Hebrew support.
Unlike Linux, freebsd has a standard documentation place. Whereas in Linux you must go and find the documentation for the specific distribution, in freebsd its all there.
You're not comparing like with like. It is similar to this: "Wheras in *BSD you have to find the documentation for the specific version, in Debian it's all there". Nevertheless, the LDP is worth a look if you want Linux documentation.
I really needed something as funny as this to brighten my day. Seriously, though, I don't recall all the specifics, but I do believe that, unless some brilliant advances in number theory or computational power happen soon, RSA encryption will be one of the best types around, at least mathematically speaking.
I think this is a slightly risky viewpoint. We do not yet have a mathematical proof that prime-factorising is hard (and even if it is hard in the asymptotical sense, as N -> infinity, that doesn't mean RSA isn't easily crackable for any particular values of N we might use). Most mathematicians believe that is hard, but nobody can prove it.
Although it would be remarkable for someone to find a counterexample to this viewpoint, it is not unprecedented. People used to believe that "strange attractors", like the Lorenz fractal, could not exist. Frege spent years developing his set theory, only for Russell to show that it was inconsistent.
Though seems unlikely that an unknown person might find the counterexample, it's a bad idea to dismiss it as "impossible" or "funny", because one day, in some mathematical field or another, it'll happen. Save the laughter for the many people who still believe they can trisect the angle, square the circle, double the cube etc., in the face of proofs of their impossibility.
Funny how 3 organisations with no revenue can make a loss.
For all practical purposes, NetBSD is dead.
Except the practical purpose that "NetBSD is being actively supported, runs on almost anything, and this will continue for the forseeable future". Which, TBH, is all that matters. It is a UNIX so most free stuff does run on it and will run on it for the forseeable future.
Actually, they ould just use speed cameras like they have today, but properly. The problem with speed cameras is that people slow down only while they drive past the camera. They could fix this as follows. Speed cameras track who goes past at what time. Big computer gets this info. If anyone has passed between 2 cameras so fast that they must've broken the speed limit, book them. So if I drive from London to Leeds on the M1, and I average above 70 mph, I'll get caught.
That'd seem better than burdening everyone's cars with expensive, fallible hardwrae.
Actually, I find that our pure and perfect dialect is not a lot different from your inferior imitation .
Except, that is, when talking about cars. Will these speed limiters be fitted on autos too, or just manuals? Will they only work on motorways, or will every last ginnel be covered? Do GPS receivers go in the boot or under the bonnet - or can you get them built into the windscreen? And will they be in wagons and coaches and other diesel vehicules too? (Not that I've got one). Apart from cars (oh yes, and your inability to say "courgette", which is apparently zuchini which is apparently a type of "squash" (which I thought was a drink)) I never had dialect problems conversing with an American.
if only gnome *was* actually technically superior...
To CDE??? I would strongly argue that it is. AFAICS CDE was an attempt at a standard-ish UI, not a fully-fledged component model, and I don't think it was very good at even that.
This does not qualify as "news for nerds". Maybe news for marketing droids.
I disagree - too often a technically superior system has died because there wasn't the right marketing behind it - take OS/2 for example. Here we see that GNOME is not in danger of suffering from that.
Although it's not very hard to type pretty fast in an alphabetic script, it's a lot harder in chinese. The fastest you can get at the moment basically requires a special type of keyboard, one with all 200-odd radical components of characters on, and you type all the components that are in the character you want, and the software works out which character that is.
However, this technology is reportedly very hard to learn, and not at all widespread. Most people who type chinese characters use software where you type the sound of the character (in the roman alphabet) and it gives you a list of characters to pick from.
Chinese speech recognition could be much better than this. It could pick up on the tones a speaker uses much better than the roman alphabet can, and it wouldn't require them to know a foreign script.
This is all in theory though. I don't know how good the software out there is at the moment. There are over 1,000,000,000 people who can read chinese characters, but not many of them have a computer.
It's ok - soggy themselves want to start selling linux, it seems - having the credit for the filesystem will just make them seem more informed I guess.
Anyone think the law should consider it to be harassment, and hence criminal, to try to enforce patents when you know you'd have no hope of winning a lawsuit? Although I guess if the USPTO are too stupid to realise it's prior art, then it's hard to argue a court would never fall for it.
All OSS authors do not live in the US, believe it or not.
I don't think the original poster said they do. I think the point was that any particular spot on the globe will be expensive to visit for many people. I'm in SE England, 3 hours' train journey away, but I wouldn't have $100 lying around to spend on the journey. (Although in my case I am certainly not an essential free software developer!)
Have you considered all the people in Europe who can't go to all the meetings in the US for the same reasons?
The poster didn't appear to be advocating meetings in the US - rather online meetings.
Have you considered that just *maybe* some in the open-source movement are tired of US capitalist attitudes, and find Europeans more open and accepting?
I'm not sure I agree with the point that was being made by the original poster, i.e. that face-to-face meetings are no use, but I wouldn't go so far as to say that it displayed "US capitalist attitudes".
but what've they [the FSF] done lately besides bitch and moan?
I would say they do a lot. The point is not whether RMS, or anyone else associated with the FSF, is pouring out loads of code today (although Miguel certainly is). That was never the point of the FSF. The point of the FSF is to create the social forces neccessary to cause free software to flourish. In the beginning, that meant writing a free C compiler. Then it meant writing the GPL, and organising an effort to clone UNIX (but notice that the most important job they did was to ensure that the uncool, boring, essential bits got written). Another valuable thing they did was to help launch the Debian project, so that there would be a GNU/Linux distribution focused on freeness. More recently, they helped organise a lot of the infrastructure needed to launch GNOME (and hence a big factor in causing the existence of *two* free desktop environments). All those projects are now ticking along nicely and would continue if the FSF disappeared tomorrow, but none of them have quite the same scope as the FSF.
They are a big force in finding gaps which nobody is filling, and ensuring that they get filled. The FSF is unique in that its primary goal is to foster free software, and it is working and has worked on things which would be outside the scope of any of the other projects mentioned above. (Also remember that they do a lot of behind the scenes work, e.g. on ensuring that the GPL is enforced, that the public never gets to hear about).
Slashdot Mirror
Is "Póg mo th-On" a standard phrase, or a translation of the French?
sigh. Another person who thinks the troubles would be solved by a united Ireland. There are very few English people living in Northern Ireland; however, 60% of the NI population are unionists and want NI to remain part of Britain. So if the Republic of Ireland owned Northern Ireland, the problem would still be just as bad.
Hopefully one day people will be past caring and the two communities can integrate. Tiocfaidh an là, to steal a phrase.
I don't think Guinness does support the IRA. However, I don't think it would be a point in their favour if they did. The IRA isn't about republicanism any more, it's just about terrorism and gang warfare. If you wish to support the Irish republican cause, may I suggest donating to the SDLP instead, as they won't ever blow innocent civilians up. As far as the Northern Ireland question, I don't think the British government could care less, it would happily hand NI to the Republic of Ireland if it would solve the problem (which it wouldn't - a majority of NI residents are unionist).
[This may be slightly OT: moderate me down then. I'm on 100 Karma, but dropping below that will be no big deal. The real big deal will be when I drop below 0x40]
I take your point about people not challenging complaints, but surely you don't think that a www.guinnesssucks.com is cybersquatting if it complains about guinness? I'd've thought that was a legitimate use for that name.
Isn't DVD basically uncompressed?
But the list of free video compression formats is very small - non-existent? - so they probably didn't have much choice (given that RMS ain't gonna use something non-free like MPEG).
Yeah, I quite agree. I was just wondering from a technical perspective cos I don't know much about
Would WINE be any use?
Bullshit. It's about Microsoft having created a proprietory Hebrew character set (windows 1255) when there were already open standards available (iso-8859-8). One reason he can't read Hebrew text with Netscape is because everyone is using the Windows character set, and not unicode or iso-8859-8.
That may be true for Hebrew. In 1998, Microsoft refused to translate Windows into Icelandic, even when the Icelandic government offered to pay. They only relented after a lot of bad publicity and threats of legislation from the Icelandic government.
Icelandic is a language with a quarter of a million speakers and a national government on its side. If they have difficulty negotiating with Microsoft, then what hope is there for the 90% of languages with less speakers and no government support?
Sorry to argue with your point, which you may have only meant to apply to Hebrew, but this is one place where I think non-free software can be really bad. Even if companies offer some support for a language in one version of a product, there's no guarantee that they'll continue supporting that language in future. Minority language speakers are left in a state of precarious dependence. On the other hand, free software can offer the chance to have sustainable support for a language, as long as there's a single fluent speaker willing to put in the time.
Directly, not a lot. But if you get a unicode font, then it will contain the glyphs for Hebrew.
Are you familiar with catdoc and xls2csv? I don't know how well they cope with text that is non-(8859-1) and non-unicode, though. As to the proprietory character set thing, the answer in the long run is unicode, but meanwhile mozilla 0.7 claims to have some Hebrew support.
You're not comparing like with like. It is similar to this: "Wheras in *BSD you have to find the documentation for the specific version, in Debian it's all there". Nevertheless, the LDP is worth a look if you want Linux documentation.
Ok, point taken.
I think this is a slightly risky viewpoint. We do not yet have a mathematical proof that prime-factorising is hard (and even if it is hard in the asymptotical sense, as N -> infinity, that doesn't mean RSA isn't easily crackable for any particular values of N we might use). Most mathematicians believe that is hard, but nobody can prove it.
Although it would be remarkable for someone to find a counterexample to this viewpoint, it is not unprecedented. People used to believe that "strange attractors", like the Lorenz fractal, could not exist. Frege spent years developing his set theory, only for Russell to show that it was inconsistent.
Though seems unlikely that an unknown person might find the counterexample, it's a bad idea to dismiss it as "impossible" or "funny", because one day, in some mathematical field or another, it'll happen. Save the laughter for the many people who still believe they can trisect the angle, square the circle, double the cube etc., in the face of proofs of their impossibility.
Funny how 3 organisations with no revenue can make a loss.
Except the practical purpose that "NetBSD is being actively supported, runs on almost anything, and this will continue for the forseeable future". Which, TBH, is all that matters. It is a UNIX so most free stuff does run on it and will run on it for the forseeable future.
Actually, they ould just use speed cameras like they have today, but properly. The problem with speed cameras is that people slow down only while they drive past the camera. They could fix this as follows. Speed cameras track who goes past at what time. Big computer gets this info. If anyone has passed between 2 cameras so fast that they must've broken the speed limit, book them. So if I drive from London to Leeds on the M1, and I average above 70 mph, I'll get caught.
That'd seem better than burdening everyone's cars with expensive, fallible hardwrae.
You're quite right on both counts (though there is a 22 mile tunnel connecting us to [the rest of] Europe).
Actually, I find that our pure and perfect dialect is not a lot different from your inferior imitation .
Except, that is, when talking about cars. Will these speed limiters be fitted on autos too, or just manuals? Will they only work on motorways, or will every last ginnel be covered? Do GPS receivers go in the boot or under the bonnet - or can you get them built into the windscreen? And will they be in wagons and coaches and other diesel vehicules too? (Not that I've got one). Apart from cars (oh yes, and your inability to say "courgette", which is apparently zuchini which is apparently a type of "squash" (which I thought was a drink)) I never had dialect problems conversing with an American.
To CDE??? I would strongly argue that it is. AFAICS CDE was an attempt at a standard-ish UI, not a fully-fledged component model, and I don't think it was very good at even that.
I disagree - too often a technically superior system has died because there wasn't the right marketing behind it - take OS/2 for example. Here we see that GNOME is not in danger of suffering from that.
Although it's not very hard to type pretty fast in an alphabetic script, it's a lot harder in chinese. The fastest you can get at the moment basically requires a special type of keyboard, one with all 200-odd radical components of characters on, and you type all the components that are in the character you want, and the software works out which character that is.
However, this technology is reportedly very hard to learn, and not at all widespread. Most people who type chinese characters use software where you type the sound of the character (in the roman alphabet) and it gives you a list of characters to pick from.
Chinese speech recognition could be much better than this. It could pick up on the tones a speaker uses much better than the roman alphabet can, and it wouldn't require them to know a foreign script.
This is all in theory though. I don't know how good the software out there is at the moment. There are over 1,000,000,000 people who can read chinese characters, but not many of them have a computer.
Anyone think the law should consider it to be harassment, and hence criminal, to try to enforce patents when you know you'd have no hope of winning a lawsuit? Although I guess if the USPTO are too stupid to realise it's prior art, then it's hard to argue a court would never fall for it.
I don't think the original poster said they do. I think the point was that any particular spot on the globe will be expensive to visit for many people. I'm in SE England, 3 hours' train journey away, but I wouldn't have $100 lying around to spend on the journey. (Although in my case I am certainly not an essential free software developer!)
The poster didn't appear to be advocating meetings in the US - rather online meetings.
I'm not sure I agree with the point that was being made by the original poster, i.e. that face-to-face meetings are no use, but I wouldn't go so far as to say that it displayed "US capitalist attitudes".
I would say they do a lot. The point is not whether RMS, or anyone else associated with the FSF, is pouring out loads of code today (although Miguel certainly is). That was never the point of the FSF. The point of the FSF is to create the social forces neccessary to cause free software to flourish. In the beginning, that meant writing a free C compiler. Then it meant writing the GPL, and organising an effort to clone UNIX (but notice that the most important job they did was to ensure that the uncool, boring, essential bits got written). Another valuable thing they did was to help launch the Debian project, so that there would be a GNU/Linux distribution focused on freeness. More recently, they helped organise a lot of the infrastructure needed to launch GNOME (and hence a big factor in causing the existence of *two* free desktop environments). All those projects are now ticking along nicely and would continue if the FSF disappeared tomorrow, but none of them have quite the same scope as the FSF.
They are a big force in finding gaps which nobody is filling, and ensuring that they get filled. The FSF is unique in that its primary goal is to foster free software, and it is working and has worked on things which would be outside the scope of any of the other projects mentioned above. (Also remember that they do a lot of behind the scenes work, e.g. on ensuring that the GPL is enforced, that the public never gets to hear about).