I see you misunderstood me. I'm not perpetuating your tired falsehood that windows crashes every 6 hours like in windows 98. I'm pointing out that windows is unstable. If you think it's a tired falsehood, that's your own experience - I've seen different, recently.
That aside, windows frequently requires reboots for upgrades and patches, when it should not require them. A daemon needs to be upgraded - fine. Stop it, replace its libraries/etc., and start it. If windows can't properly unload uncache and forget about an old library version (when a new one has been put in its place) without a reboot (a right proper ram purge! how refreshing, colon blow 3000 does it again!), then it is unstable.
If you want to argue the security of maintaining the cache, something along the lines of how some of the BSDs can be run - you're welcome to it, but keep in mind theirs is intentional (hence why you can't do it at all) and MS's isn't (hence why you can't do it only in the instances when you are the rightful admin who wants to).
The host OS in any such virtualization needs to do just a few things. 1) stay f*cking available. 2) use few resources, while providing access to all availble resources. 3) get out of the damned way. I don't see where Windows concievably wins out on this if it's hosting Linux virtualizations.
For all of you out there who love the stability of linux, running under the instability of a host windows operating system.
I don't see this functionality as likely to be used anywhere but the desktop (e.g. developers/etc. who want more than cygwin offers), which afaik isn't remotely their target for this?
Precisely. How dare people try to indicate when information will no longer be correct and the cache should be refreshed.
We should just cache the internet for 10 years and save ourselves all that DNS traffic. Servers never change IPs anyways (at least, if we all cache for 10 years they better not plan to!).
1) my wife wants them, I will want them more eventually. 2) I like the idea of teaching/showing my children all sorts of things, and letting them go out and maybe improve this world. 3) I have this instinctive drive to have lots of sex, and eventually one of those bastards is going to get lucky.
"Do you even know what a virus is?"
1) yes. 2) it's a figure of speech. 3) a planet/ecosystem is arguably just as alive as a person.
When are you too old to ride the child-safe aol chat room?
Seriously. I'm sure the whole point is that 40 year old men don't stumble in there. So, what about 35? 30? 25? 20? 17? women?
If you're past the age of consent, are you still a child? AoL should add some terms of service that list that they cannot protect young men and women with raging hormones, regardless of the chat room, if they're going to be giving out their phone numbers and the likes.
I'm sorry, she's probably not 'the aggressor' - but she's not innocent either. Plenty of 15yr olds are slutting it up - her parents should be happy she was doing it online and just talking instead of being pounded by the local football team and getting pregnant.
That's fine - if you offer a 100% free service, it can do as much or as little as you want it to.
Just don't pay for it with tax dollars, then it's not free.
It will actually cost them a lot more to implement and maintain filters than the 'free wifi' they are providing will cost. Think about where that money could go, instead of "protecting truckers", the poor innocent truckers. Maybe they could spend some of that money on extra police to get rid of the truckstop prostitutes (I shit you not). Which would you say is really a 'bigger moral threat' if they're wanting to go that route?
It's all BS - provide a full proper service or none at all if you're using tax dollars. Leave the usage to the people (this is wifi, as in it will be laptops within their truck - not sitting at a terminal in public)
If everyone in the world switched to using bitkeeper, then legally no other source management software could be developed. Think about what a shitty restriction that is.
The.pro domain was specifically stated to be created for 'professionals' - doctors, lawyers - basically jobs you would have recognized as professionals in 1950, it's not just ANY professional that could get a.pro!
The problem is they're not doing any checking, they're just opening up the.pro for anyone who has the cash. Personally I wouldn't see that as a problem, but the fact of the matter is it was originally intended to be established, checked, professionals.
I suppose the real point was to say "these people have been checked and have shown they are professional, so you can trust them - at some level - with your information". Basically a free 'level of trust', similar to a SSL cert.
The problem is, amongst other things, nobody would goddamned well know that. Joe schmoe is going to put more trust in law.com than law.pro - "what the hell is pro".
Most people just go out there and get their.com - maybe the net and org - and are done with it. A few of the niche markets get their.tv for example (oh the irony), but that's recognizable - and they're pimping their URL at you constantly while you watch. I could understand a.law for lawyers and the likes, but.pro is just too generic.
IMO - the concept has failed, and was a bad assumption to begin with. If you're going to be branching out more and more domains, trying to bring in the big bucks, make them really friggin specific so they're useful.
You don't need meetup to have a group - just have regular meetings and post your group info out there, on some random webpage - it'll show up in google for anyone who is looking.
no amount of easy to use software is going to convince random people to congregate together - it's the message that matters. Meetup isn't a service - it's a very limited template system with forums.
I've had one glass cutting board for several years, and it's never chipped or broken in any way. I only use knives on mine. I doubt it would be safe to use with a meat cleaver, however the manufacturer guarantees them for life.
Just think - with overpopulation and limited resources, moving out into space solves all our problems for FREE!
Oh wait - no it doesn't. Say we even manage to get 1% of the earths population out there off the earth. We'll quickly replace that number on earth alone, despite all the effort (and vast resources) being put forth to sustain the colonies that are to be created off-world. Now we have even fewer resources, for still more population. We'll still be providing the resources for that off-world population (plus a big load of technology) for years to come, easily a few generations, before they can become reasonably self-sufficient.
Even when that point comes, we'll just be back where we started - humans ruining other moons or planets.
Maybe we should get our shit together at home before we spread forth, otherwise we're the same as all of those 'evil aliens' in all our movies that come to steal the earths resources. Didn't you ever wonder why that was such a common plot point?
If we don't, we're just a virus and a plague on this galaxy.
No, it was to give them a temporary monopoly since they (theoretically) spent all that time/money developing it - since it should not have been something that is plainly obvious from existing knowledge/technologies.
In fact, originally (in the US, from 1790) a model was required to demonstrate how it functioned, but that requirement was removed in 1870.
I would argue that maybe you don't have to actually build one, but you need to throw down a lot of proof that you know it could work, and if things don't work out that way then you haven't yet patented whatever you've just created, and you need to patent the proper method.
The reasons they build UAVs in the first place is because they can't bring agents into the area, because its still too hostile. I hardly think a family picnic is so 'hostile' as to require a UAV.
Clearly you've never been to one of my family picnics!
I didn't say it made Debian better, but if you want to go there - yes, I can match your ports point for point, and in addition I have other advantages. Guess I'm still falling short with Debian.
more to the point...
Obviously you want to handle things through your package manager - it's a little unfair to compare the 3rd party installer to a script written in response to the 3rd party installer that "plays nice" with ones system, when someone could easily write such a script for another ones system.
If you wanted to go the proper route:
So your script written by a human maintainer couldn't possibly overwrite your libc, but my script written by a human maintainer couldn't possibly prevent it. Behold the power of Gentoo.
Someone builds a.deb that does essentially the same thing that whoever built the (port) script for the emerge does. They've had packages like this before - there was one for Quake2 that had you insert the cd, for e.g.
Quake3 installed just fine from the CD on my Debian box, and on the whole - I don't see a reason to be managing my games from within my distributions packaging system... it's not like there are things dependant on them, nor will updates ever be particularly integrated with anyones (upgrades for games tend to be.zip anyway, not a huge painful process)
and about the whole 'speed' nonissue - any official Debian package also has a source package that you can download and compile and install yourself, all with simple commands - to set whatever optimizations you want.
I can attest to that, as people here in my office have been known to misclick during a popup (and raise a window on top of it) and scream 'Where did it go!'. They have desk jobs, using a computer probably 75% of the time (though much of it is proofreading / checking or dealing with email I believe).
They're gainfully employed and have to come ask us to get their sound to work; hint: unmute or plug in their speakers which they popped out.
That said - I sure wish they did have a little better baseline. It's tedious and interrupts me so badly as to cause me to pop over to/. briefly, wasting more of my time.
Slashdot Mirror
I see you misunderstood me. I'm not perpetuating your tired falsehood that windows crashes every 6 hours like in windows 98. I'm pointing out that windows is unstable. If you think it's a tired falsehood, that's your own experience - I've seen different, recently.
That aside, windows frequently requires reboots for upgrades and patches, when it should not require them. A daemon needs to be upgraded - fine. Stop it, replace its libraries/etc., and start it. If windows can't properly unload uncache and forget about an old library version (when a new one has been put in its place) without a reboot (a right proper ram purge! how refreshing, colon blow 3000 does it again!), then it is unstable.
If you want to argue the security of maintaining the cache, something along the lines of how some of the BSDs can be run - you're welcome to it, but keep in mind theirs is intentional (hence why you can't do it at all) and MS's isn't (hence why you can't do it only in the instances when you are the rightful admin who wants to).
The host OS in any such virtualization needs to do just a few things. 1) stay f*cking available. 2) use few resources, while providing access to all availble resources. 3) get out of the damned way. I don't see where Windows concievably wins out on this if it's hosting Linux virtualizations.
For all of you out there who love the stability of linux, running under the instability of a host windows operating system.
I don't see this functionality as likely to be used anywhere but the desktop (e.g. developers/etc. who want more than cygwin offers), which afaik isn't remotely their target for this?
Precisely. How dare people try to indicate when information will no longer be correct and the cache should be refreshed.
We should just cache the internet for 10 years and save ourselves all that DNS traffic. Servers never change IPs anyways (at least, if we all cache for 10 years they better not plan to!).
"Why ever have children?"
1) my wife wants them, I will want them more eventually.
2) I like the idea of teaching/showing my children all sorts of things, and letting them go out and maybe improve this world.
3) I have this instinctive drive to have lots of sex, and eventually one of those bastards is going to get lucky.
"Do you even know what a virus is?"
1) yes.
2) it's a figure of speech.
3) a planet/ecosystem is arguably just as alive as a person.
When are you too old to ride the child-safe aol chat room?
Seriously. I'm sure the whole point is that 40 year old men don't stumble in there. So, what about 35? 30? 25? 20? 17? women?
If you're past the age of consent, are you still a child? AoL should add some terms of service that list that they cannot protect young men and women with raging hormones, regardless of the chat room, if they're going to be giving out their phone numbers and the likes.
I'm sorry, she's probably not 'the aggressor' - but she's not innocent either. Plenty of 15yr olds are slutting it up - her parents should be happy she was doing it online and just talking instead of being pounded by the local football team and getting pregnant.
That's fine - if you offer a 100% free service, it can do as much or as little as you want it to.
Just don't pay for it with tax dollars, then it's not free.
It will actually cost them a lot more to implement and maintain filters than the 'free wifi' they are providing will cost. Think about where that money could go, instead of "protecting truckers", the poor innocent truckers. Maybe they could spend some of that money on extra police to get rid of the truckstop prostitutes (I shit you not). Which would you say is really a 'bigger moral threat' if they're wanting to go that route?
It's all BS - provide a full proper service or none at all if you're using tax dollars. Leave the usage to the people (this is wifi, as in it will be laptops within their truck - not sitting at a terminal in public)
If everyone in the world switched to using bitkeeper, then legally no other source management software could be developed. Think about what a shitty restriction that is.
That must be where all their profit comes from, pimping their online customers.
Oh well, it's not new - just sleazy.
I'd make some comments about this, but you'll probably get your computer stolen before you could read them anyway.
The .pro domain was specifically stated to be created for 'professionals' - doctors, lawyers - basically jobs you would have recognized as professionals in 1950, it's not just ANY professional that could get a .pro!
.pro for anyone who has the cash. Personally I wouldn't see that as a problem, but the fact of the matter is it was originally intended to be established, checked, professionals.
.com - maybe the net and org - and are done with it. A few of the niche markets get their .tv for example (oh the irony), but that's recognizable - and they're pimping their URL at you constantly while you watch. I could understand a .law for lawyers and the likes, but .pro is just too generic.
The problem is they're not doing any checking, they're just opening up the
I suppose the real point was to say "these people have been checked and have shown they are professional, so you can trust them - at some level - with your information". Basically a free 'level of trust', similar to a SSL cert.
The problem is, amongst other things, nobody would goddamned well know that. Joe schmoe is going to put more trust in law.com than law.pro - "what the hell is pro".
Most people just go out there and get their
IMO - the concept has failed, and was a bad assumption to begin with. If you're going to be branching out more and more domains, trying to bring in the big bucks, make them really friggin specific so they're useful.
You don't need meetup to have a group - just have regular meetings and post your group info out there, on some random webpage - it'll show up in google for anyone who is looking.
no amount of easy to use software is going to convince random people to congregate together - it's the message that matters. Meetup isn't a service - it's a very limited template system with forums.
Mmmm sucking glass shards - such a delicacy.
I've had one glass cutting board for several years, and it's never chipped or broken in any way. I only use knives on mine. I doubt it would be safe to use with a meat cleaver, however the manufacturer guarantees them for life.
Its life, or yours?
So you think that if bitkeeper never had a free version, the kernel developers still would have picked it up for core repository ?
I'm not saying they wouldn't have, but I am saying they wouldn't have done it lightly.
Just think - with overpopulation and limited resources, moving out into space solves all our problems for FREE!
Oh wait - no it doesn't. Say we even manage to get 1% of the earths population out there off the earth. We'll quickly replace that number on earth alone, despite all the effort (and vast resources) being put forth to sustain the colonies that are to be created off-world. Now we have even fewer resources, for still more population. We'll still be providing the resources for that off-world population (plus a big load of technology) for years to come, easily a few generations, before they can become reasonably self-sufficient.
Even when that point comes, we'll just be back where we started - humans ruining other moons or planets.
Maybe we should get our shit together at home before we spread forth, otherwise we're the same as all of those 'evil aliens' in all our movies that come to steal the earths resources. Didn't you ever wonder why that was such a common plot point?
If we don't, we're just a virus and a plague on this galaxy.
Or maybe it's because all those people are late for work.
yay, more rushed idiots on the road.
No, it was to give them a temporary monopoly since they (theoretically) spent all that time/money developing it - since it should not have been something that is plainly obvious from existing knowledge/technologies.
In fact, originally (in the US, from 1790) a model was required to demonstrate how it functioned, but that requirement was removed in 1870.
I would argue that maybe you don't have to actually build one, but you need to throw down a lot of proof that you know it could work, and if things don't work out that way then you haven't yet patented whatever you've just created, and you need to patent the proper method.
The reasons they build UAVs in the first place is because they can't bring agents into the area, because its still too hostile. I hardly think a family picnic is so 'hostile' as to require a UAV.
Clearly you've never been to one of my family picnics!
I didn't say it made Debian better, but if you want to go there - yes, I can match your ports point for point, and in addition I have other advantages. Guess I'm still falling short with Debian.
...
more to the point
Obviously you want to handle things through your package manager - it's a little unfair to compare the 3rd party installer to a script written in response to the 3rd party installer that "plays nice" with ones system, when someone could easily write such a script for another ones system.
If you wanted to go the proper route:
So your script written by a human maintainer couldn't possibly overwrite your libc, but my script written by a human maintainer couldn't possibly prevent it. Behold the power of Gentoo.
Drive through please.
is Grand Theft Auto.
Do you honestly think these kids couldn't get their inattentive parents to buy them sex/drugs/rock and roll if they wanted to?
We should be happy such children are tied to an electrical outlet somewhere instead of out on the streets!
It's the parents job to censor what their children experience, the game is rated for 18yrs and up to boot!
I can't seem to find it yet, anyone have it?
Someone builds a .deb that does essentially the same thing that whoever built the (port) script for the emerge does. They've had packages like this before - there was one for Quake2 that had you insert the cd, for e.g.
.zip anyway, not a huge painful process)
Quake3 installed just fine from the CD on my Debian box, and on the whole - I don't see a reason to be managing my games from within my distributions packaging system... it's not like there are things dependant on them, nor will updates ever be particularly integrated with anyones (upgrades for games tend to be
and about the whole 'speed' nonissue - any official Debian package also has a source package that you can download and compile and install yourself, all with simple commands - to set whatever optimizations you want.
I suggest you get a telecommuting job, and a laptop with wireless.
Then you don't need to leave bed.
Wait, their OSS development is in competition with Americas? Hmmmm pearl harbor ... bush ....
tough call.
ok, Japan wins hands down.
I thought it said 'boots' - my jaw dropped and I was about to start Googling for home addresses of their OSS projects. :P
I can attest to that, as people here in my office have been known to misclick during a popup (and raise a window on top of it) and scream 'Where did it go!'. They have desk jobs, using a computer probably 75% of the time (though much of it is proofreading / checking or dealing with email I believe).
/. briefly, wasting more of my time.
They're gainfully employed and have to come ask us to get their sound to work; hint: unmute or plug in their speakers which they popped out.
That said - I sure wish they did have a little better baseline. It's tedious and interrupts me so badly as to cause me to pop over to