>These studies have been done, [...] The studies found that while the children had no greater tendencies to be homosexuals themselves, they were deeply traumatized by having been raised by parents with a mental disorder (homosexuality).
What? Homosexuality hasn't been classified as a mental disorder since the early 1970s.
The thing is these upheavals you prophesize surely can, do and WILL happen, but typically, there's a lot of useless human suffering along the way before the world ends up a better place...
>Imagine if [...] these people decided to move to linux because they didn't want to pay for a Windows licence?
Done!
I've gotten rid of Windows at home, and it was a lot more work to set up, but I am much more satisfied with Gentoo than I EVER was with Windows. Windows CAN'T compare.
Why aren't there software-piracy raids? I mean I understand about the RIAA having huge lobbying power and all, but if you do the math, you'll no doubt find that there is more money lost to software piracy every year than there is to MP3-trading.
A song has been valued at 99 cents recently, but a Windows license is typically 300 dollars, and I'm sure there are millions of pirated copies of Windows out there.
Even if software piracy ISN'T as big as music-piracy, it must still be huge.
Why aren't there more software-audits?
Why are governments placing a disproportionate amount of emphasis on something like music-piracy?
>Removing spiders and fixing cars are the things that most immediately come to mind. Face it, they wouldn't be able to live in their houses *or* leave them without us!
Dude, you shouldn't have posted that anonymously, now the Nobel committee won't know where to send the award!
It would be interesting to make a study and see if the offspring of homosexuals has a greater tendency towards being homosexuals that offspring of heterosexual mates...
I have to guess that there would be in fact no significant difference, because heterosexuals have been breeding homosexuals for centuries...
Since IMAP is a centralized solution, functionality could be built into it to give the server feedback about spam messages; if a few hundred users complain via this mechanism about an identical message, it can be moved to users junk boxes, even before other users have a chance to see it.
I bet you that you can abstract even further in c/c++ than you can in Java, because you have access to literally everything directly; memory, hardware.
And with pointers, references and all the other syntax c/c++ have that Java doesn't, how could it be less?
c/c++ is RICHER than Java.
Don't get me wrong; I LOVE Java, I really do!
With Java, it WAS simple to create theads of execution that would load classes from disk or create them at runtime, classes that serialized themselves and shot around a network and re-instantiated themselves somewhere else and talked with other systems... I mean come on, it's the COMPUTER WITHIN A COMPUTER, that's what Java is! Pretty cool.
But equally, you could obtain all the necessary libs to do the same thing in c/c++.
And in c/c++, you could abstract the mechanism any way you see fit, every module can have a different memory addresing/allocation schemes if you want, and you have all the granularity of control you want.
What we'd need is a transputer, so that programming languages really WON'T matter anymore.
c/c++/Java would all be pretty much equivalent in terms of execution speed.
http://arstechnica.com/cpu/2q00/x86future/isa-fu tu re-4.html
Scroll down (3rd or 4th paragraph) the page until you get to the paragraph about the HP Dynamo chip.
It begins "Dynamo is an odd beast."
It wouldn't matter which language you chose.
It would really be a question of which tool you felt went with the job at hand and how comfortable you are with that language.
>An operating system is supposed to be a stable standard platform for development and use. Slow changes over time are a fact of life, but should rarely break old software. Having to worry about supporting Joez/Linux 2.4b8 with Flux Capacitor mod 1.9 as well as the main versions is a pain for professional developers.
Yeah. I suppose you should end up drawing the line somewhere, but at least the freedom to continue still exists since you have the source.
Actually, in the case of old hardware, donation to a school could teach students how to program it!
Take video cards; after a certain date, a graphic card is outdated, right? You end up buying a new one that's got a whole new layer of technology in it, and the great circle of r&d goes around again. Industry is strong.
Here is where industry can sow; since there won't be any more units like the old card built, why not open the specs and let schools take a crack at it?
Learning computer science with teaching tools like Java is great, but there's nothing that will challenge a mind so much as a development project for hardware.
And when these students look for jobs, there'll be a payoff for the industry; a better industry!
OK, admittedly, my example was a bad one, but it was hypothetical.
What I'm trying to say is FREEDOM
With Linux, anyone who has the desire to understand enough can modify whatever they want to their EXACT needs.
I suppose that's also why Linux is criticized; there isn't ONE authority wholly focused on the need to standardize everything to the point where the computer is a gulag and the user is a prisoner.
Your viewpoint is respected too: there is also the freedom to work with distributions that are for users who have a strong need for stability.
User x needs the O(1) scheduler in kernel 2.5, but NOT the built-in ALSA that also comes with 2.5 because he's got some exotic sound hardware, and tests with a linux-on-cd (or something like that) distro he's done have shown that his hardware CAN'T get along with ALSA as it is in 2.5.
But he needs the 0(1) scheduler because some other aspect of his project will benefit from it...
What to do?
Well, because it's open-source we're talking about, the user has the possibility of getting one option but not the other.
Yes, I guess it DOES create a fork, but in this case, it's warranted for this user.
>I don't see that back-porting mods is less risky.
I think you've summed it up, right there. It isn't safer, but it's something open-source gives YOU the ability to determine.
CAN you fork when the source is open? If a fork springs to life and has more adoption than the unforked branch, doesn't that mean that it suits users' needs better?
Any change to your kernel involves risks, but at least you get to choose.
Slashdot Mirror
And the prescription is MORE COWBELL!
Wait, this isn't Fark... Never mind.
Seriously, I've noticed this too, but it only appears to be a problem on my 2.4 kernel boxes. Not on 2.6
Can anyone else confirm?
>Try using the free Media Player Classic.
or how about VideoLan Client?
http://www.videolan.org/
>I'm not sorry for them. Not even a little bit.
When the whole thing'll crumble, who do you think will be left with the aftermath?
Not the executives with golden parachutes.
It'll be everyone who has their money in Baystar funds.
That means the little guy, of course.
I feel sorry for them.
>These studies have been done, [...] The studies found that while the children had no greater tendencies to be homosexuals themselves, they were deeply traumatized by having been raised by parents with a mental disorder (homosexuality).
What? Homosexuality hasn't been classified as a mental disorder since the early 1970s.
What are these studies you are talking about?
Pffft... Obviously a troll.
If I had points I'd mod you up in a hot-second.
The thing is these upheavals you prophesize surely can, do and WILL happen, but typically, there's a lot of useless human suffering along the way before the world ends up a better place...
>Imagine if [...] these people decided to move to linux because they didn't want to pay for a Windows licence?
Done!
I've gotten rid of Windows at home, and it was a lot more work to set up, but I am much more satisfied with Gentoo than I EVER was with Windows. Windows CAN'T compare.
Why aren't there software-piracy raids?
I mean I understand about the RIAA having huge lobbying power and all, but if you do the math, you'll no doubt find that there is more money lost to software piracy every year than there is to MP3-trading.
A song has been valued at 99 cents recently, but a Windows license is typically 300 dollars, and I'm sure there are millions of pirated copies of Windows out there.
Even if software piracy ISN'T as big as music-piracy, it must still be huge.
Why aren't there more software-audits?
Why are governments placing a disproportionate amount of emphasis on something like music-piracy?
>Removing spiders and fixing cars are the things that most immediately come to mind. Face it, they wouldn't be able to live in their houses *or* leave them without us!
Dude, you shouldn't have posted that anonymously, now the Nobel committee won't know where to send the award!
WAIT.
I believe there is still the matter of The Swimsuit Competition.
What? There's _NO_ Swimsuit Competition?
You mean I shaved my bikini-zone for nothing?
Damn!
It would be interesting to make a study and see if the offspring of homosexuals has a greater tendency towards being homosexuals that offspring of heterosexual mates...
I have to guess that there would be in fact no significant difference, because heterosexuals have been breeding homosexuals for centuries...
We, as a species (males) have to come up with something, ANYTHING to make women keep needing us.
Scratching yourself and burping doesn't count.
welcome our ant overlords
I wonder what makes him more qualified than anyone else besides being an american?
this might explain John Galt
http://www.auburn.edu/~brickma/jgalt.html
Thanks for the info, but I'm referring to a different John Galt:
http://www.atlasshrugged.tv/
And when will we stand up for ourselves?
Since IMAP is a centralized solution, functionality could be built into it to give the server feedback about spam messages; if a few hundred users complain via this mechanism about an identical message, it can be moved to users junk boxes, even before other users have a chance to see it.
Is it dark chocolate?
Is it good quality?
I'm not cheap, you know.
I bet you that you can abstract even further in c/c++ than you can in Java, because you have access to literally everything directly; memory, hardware.
u tu re-4.html
:-)
And with pointers, references and all the other syntax c/c++ have that Java doesn't, how could it be less?
c/c++ is RICHER than Java.
Don't get me wrong; I LOVE Java, I really do!
With Java, it WAS simple to create theads of execution that would load classes from disk or create them at runtime, classes that serialized themselves and shot around a network and re-instantiated themselves somewhere else and talked with other systems... I mean come on, it's the COMPUTER WITHIN A COMPUTER, that's what Java is! Pretty cool.
But equally, you could obtain all the necessary libs to do the same thing in c/c++.
And in c/c++, you could abstract the mechanism any way you see fit, every module can have a different memory addresing/allocation schemes if you want, and you have all the granularity of control you want.
What we'd need is a transputer, so that programming languages really WON'T matter anymore.
c/c++/Java would all be pretty much equivalent in terms of execution speed.
http://arstechnica.com/cpu/2q00/x86future/isa-f
Scroll down (3rd or 4th paragraph) the page until you get to the paragraph about the HP Dynamo chip.
It begins "Dynamo is an odd beast."
It wouldn't matter which language you chose.
It would really be a question of which tool you felt went with the job at hand and how comfortable you are with that language.
I'm waitin' fer mah transputer...
PS - The whole article is great!
>An operating system is supposed to be a stable standard platform for development and use. Slow changes over time are a fact of life, but should rarely break old software. Having to worry about supporting Joez/Linux 2.4b8 with Flux Capacitor mod 1.9 as well as the main versions is a pain for professional developers.
Yeah. I suppose you should end up drawing the line somewhere, but at least the freedom to continue still exists since you have the source.
Actually, in the case of old hardware, donation to a school could teach students how to program it!
Take video cards; after a certain date, a graphic card is outdated, right? You end up buying a new one that's got a whole new layer of technology in it, and the great circle of r&d goes around again. Industry is strong.
Here is where industry can sow; since there won't be any more units like the old card built, why not open the specs and let schools take a crack at it?
Learning computer science with teaching tools like Java is great, but there's nothing that will challenge a mind so much as a development project for hardware.
And when these students look for jobs, there'll be a payoff for the industry; a better industry!
OK, admittedly, my example was a bad one, but it was hypothetical.
What I'm trying to say is FREEDOM
With Linux, anyone who has the desire to understand enough can modify whatever they want to their EXACT needs.
I suppose that's also why Linux is criticized; there isn't ONE authority wholly focused on the need to standardize everything to the point where the computer is a gulag and the user is a prisoner.
Your viewpoint is respected too: there is also the freedom to work with distributions that are for users who have a strong need for stability.
It's democracy&evolution in action.
It's like VB, Java and all high-level languages introduce unnecessary layers between me and what I'm trying to accomplish.
So I'll respond to your troll zarr, with another analogy:
When I make love I don't want ANYTHING between myself and my partner.
Have fun.
Sure, but let's look at a hypothetical scenario;
User x needs the O(1) scheduler in kernel 2.5, but NOT the built-in ALSA that also comes with 2.5 because he's got some exotic sound hardware, and tests with a linux-on-cd (or something like that) distro he's done have shown that his hardware CAN'T get along with ALSA as it is in 2.5.
But he needs the 0(1) scheduler because some other aspect of his project will benefit from it...
What to do?
Well, because it's open-source we're talking about, the user has the possibility of getting one option but not the other.
Yes, I guess it DOES create a fork, but in this case, it's warranted for this user.
>I don't see that back-porting mods is less risky.
I think you've summed it up, right there.
It isn't safer, but it's something open-source gives YOU the ability to determine.
CAN you fork when the source is open?
If a fork springs to life and has more adoption than the unforked branch, doesn't that mean that it suits users' needs better?
Any change to your kernel involves risks, but at least you get to choose.