Guns on planes -- great idea, eh? Before 9/11, there were no guns on planes. Why? Because guns can help you hijack planes.
Now, if a terrorist can get the gun from the guard, he's got the plane. At least during 9/11 one group of people in one plane managed to overwhelm the terrorists; if there had been a gun on the plane and a terrorist managed to grab it, the plane would have flown into another building (what was it, the White House?)
Not to mention, what if a bullet goes through a window?
The guns-on-planes policy is an accident waiting to happen. It will happen.
However, such an argument fails precisely because a gun couldn't have stopped two airplanes from flying into the WTC.
Um. Am I the first to suggest that the PATRIOT act wouldn't either?
Terrorists of today could reproduce 9/11 quite well (though with different targets, of course). The only difference is that the government is given more power. The only people subject to the power are innocent.
Not to mention, am I the only one who thought it strange that 9/11 was used a reason to go to war against Iraq? Why not use "I was mugged on my way to the store" as an excuse to go murder everybody in your office....
Funnily enough, just yesterday I put a " *" at the end of an "rm" command in my home directory.
Thankfully, I keep my data organized into subfolders (and rm isn't recursive by default). All I lost was a file I never use, a few symlinks, and that Windows-driver-wrapper thing, that I was debating installing because I don't like the license.
So, I'd argue that even/. users get it wrong. I've been using bash for several years with no errors whatsoever, but all it takes is a single extra character at the end of a tab-completed command and BOOM! Empty home directory!
The laptop's processor is a Pentium-M, not a Pentium4-M. Pentium-M's are newer, pack a LOT more power for their clock speed (add 500Mhz to get the equivalent Pentium4-M), and have Centrino technology (that means a wireless card that's not supported by Linux).
Yes, it's confusing, stupid, and backward. I didn't think up the name.
I am using mplayer CVS from yesterday. *Newer* versions crash, *because* they rely on ffmpeg's buggy svq3 decompression. Older versions which rely on the Windows.dll run fine. My post was perfectly clear: To use the Windows.dll and circumvent the ffmpeg codec problems, use the command I posted.
Many people find you very eccentric at times, myself included. But at the end of the day, you're right. And your vision has turned into freedom, which these days is quite a treasure.
who gives a shit? I mean really. People get a life. I mean a real life. This isn't a troll. Go out and get a woman, see a movie, hey maybe even get laid. *sighs*
When you write something like this, does it even cross your mind that perhaps clicking 'Submit' puts you in the same boat as everybody else reading this?
How's that supposed to work. 'Get our product dirt-cheap. CLICK HERE.' - *click* - 'Sorry. Your operating system has not been installed yet. Please wait.'
It has the same miserable file selector dialog as the X11 version! Won't those monkeys ever realize what a barrier to adoption that thing is? It was behind the times they moment they wrote it.
Indeed. A new file selector is in the works. In the meantime, discover the nice tab-completion feature. While I certainly agree there is room for improvement and definitely wouldn't suggest the file selector to my grandmother, I save/open files faster with the GTK dialog than any other I've used.
There are some stats (look for the pretty pie charts) which can help explain the percentage, along with a few key thoughts and speculations:
Most web sites run Linux.
Linux boxes cause so little fuss it's easy to forget they're there (for better or for worse, most distributions, especially older ones, are very content to leave you alone). I've never run across a Windows server that didn't ask for personal attention at least once every hundred days.
Website defacement is often a direct act, not a simple script which happens to take down a site. All operating systems being equal, a cracker would pick sites at random and crack them; Linux would get cracked more than any operating system, assuming the cracker is great.
In any operating system, the security is only as tight as the administrator makes it. Well-secured servers are VERY hard to come by.
A website defacement is not a remote root. It could be a simple cross-site scripting bug in some CGI/PHP/Perl code, which is not the fault of the operating system.
Yeah, I was about to post about Half-Life myself. It does have relatively complex controls. But everything is brought in so smoothly that it never overwhelms.
And teleporters and the "long jump" only came in about 2/3 of the way through the game. Weapons were spread out perfectly... that game was good:).
Lots of games seem to throw in the Tutorial and intro levels as an afterthought. It's easy to spot the difference between, say, Return to Castle Wolfenstein (a typical shooter) and Max Payne (an original shooter with a great tutorial).
Now a totally different topic: Anybody else notice KDE/GNOME comparisons? Complex games compared to simple ones?
If they hadn't, Microsoft simply wouldn't have supported PNG at all.
Is that really any better than their current support? As a web developer, I'd have been able to save a lot of effort if PNG support had simply been nonexistent, instead of again and again finding black backgrounds, white backgrounds, horrible dithering, and hundreds of other glitches. If you want IE compliance, your pngs have to be exactly like gifs except sometimes smaller.
And this isn't? The article goes on to say, "Kremen could recall only one case where a plaintiff brought a copyright infringement action against Microsoft's customers rather than the multi-billion dollar company. (In that case, IBM and Microsoft actually picked up the defense anyway and obtained a verdict in favor of their customers)."
In other words, this move of theirs costs them nothing. Not a penny. In my opinion, it's as coincidental as Microsoft's paying an undisclosed sum in licensing fees to SCO when the whole SCO-Linux thing started.
More likely there's no commerical demand for linux drivers so the corporate developers are told not to invest time in them. Open Source developers choose where to invest their time - corporates are told where.
That does make sense, but doesn't explain why they withhold specs. They do it because they think it gives them an edge over competition, which is simply wrong. I for one trust open-source drivers much more than regular ones, and would choose an open-specs chip over a closed one.
Re:Royalties via Collection and Distribution pts
on
Funding Open Source?
·
· Score: 1
As much as I love glib, gtk and QT, I think other projects are in less healthy financial situations: the dependencies idea would give most money to ancient, established libraries.
Of course, I'm too tired to think of a better model. An 80-20 split?
If they had not released the source would buy their products again...
If they had not released the source, they would be breaking the law. The world is still holding its breath for the first case of the FSF kicking ass in court.
Yes, it would be nice to get the "Secret bits," like drivers, but this is actually better for the community in the long run.
This simply doesn't make sense. Large corporations hoarding "IP" is not better for the community. Unless your definition of "community" is "Linksys." Even then, it may be better for Linksys itself if it'd release 802.11g drivers. I know that I for one would buy one of their cards if they did, and since they don't I won't.
What I want, and what I know many other people want, is an 802.11g driver. Linksys has one. They choose not to release it? Not even with a proprietary license and without support, à la nVidia? I simply cannot see how that is better for the "community."
Besides, is he even the guy that makes this decision anymore?
I can just imagine Bill Gates going into work one day, looking at his company's numbers for a bit, pausing... then going to one of his accountants and asking, "Where'd that 10 billion dollars go?"
Slashdot Mirror
Guns on planes -- great idea, eh? Before 9/11, there were no guns on planes. Why? Because guns can help you hijack planes.
Now, if a terrorist can get the gun from the guard, he's got the plane. At least during 9/11 one group of people in one plane managed to overwhelm the terrorists; if there had been a gun on the plane and a terrorist managed to grab it, the plane would have flown into another building (what was it, the White House?)
Not to mention, what if a bullet goes through a window?
The guns-on-planes policy is an accident waiting to happen. It will happen.
However, such an argument fails precisely because a gun couldn't have stopped two airplanes from flying into the WTC.
Um. Am I the first to suggest that the PATRIOT act wouldn't either?
Terrorists of today could reproduce 9/11 quite well (though with different targets, of course). The only difference is that the government is given more power. The only people subject to the power are innocent.
Not to mention, am I the only one who thought it strange that 9/11 was used a reason to go to war against Iraq? Why not use "I was mugged on my way to the store" as an excuse to go murder everybody in your office....
Funnily enough, just yesterday I put a " *" at the end of an "rm" command in my home directory.
Thankfully, I keep my data organized into subfolders (and rm isn't recursive by default). All I lost was a file I never use, a few symlinks, and that Windows-driver-wrapper thing, that I was debating installing because I don't like the license.
So, I'd argue that even /. users get it wrong. I've been using bash for several years with no errors whatsoever, but all it takes is a single extra character at the end of a tab-completed command and BOOM! Empty home directory!
The laptop's processor is a Pentium-M, not a Pentium4-M. Pentium-M's are newer, pack a LOT more power for their clock speed (add 500Mhz to get the equivalent Pentium4-M), and have Centrino technology (that means a wireless card that's not supported by Linux).
Yes, it's confusing, stupid, and backward. I didn't think up the name.
It was a snippet of sample code written in f*ck f*ck.
Why do I still see SiteFinder when I browse to www.thisurldoesnotexistxxx.com? Is that because the changes have not been propagated?
I am using mplayer CVS from yesterday. *Newer* versions crash, *because* they rely on ffmpeg's buggy svq3 decompression. Older versions which rely on the Windows .dll run fine. My post was perfectly clear: To use the Windows .dll and circumvent the ffmpeg codec problems, use the command I posted.
ffmpeg's SVQ3 decompression seems to crash with the 19MB version of the trailer. The workaround: use the win32 dlls. For mplayer:
mplayer return_of_the_king_trailer_480x280_fixed.mov -vc qtsvq3 -vf pp=al
Tinyfugue.
And if you have trouble at first: It uses Emacs keybindings -- that means Ctrl-P to go to the last line typed, Ctrl-U to clear the current line, etc.
Thank you, RMS.
Many people find you very eccentric at times, myself included. But at the end of the day, you're right. And your vision has turned into freedom, which these days is quite a treasure.
who gives a shit? I mean really. People get a life. I mean a real life. This isn't a troll. Go out and get a woman, see a movie, hey maybe even get laid. *sighs*
When you write something like this, does it even cross your mind that perhaps clicking 'Submit' puts you in the same boat as everybody else reading this?
I don't see why people need 500+ Mhz for a thin client. I mean, even 200 Mhz is overkill. Why the need for such powerhouses?
How's that supposed to work. 'Get our product dirt-cheap. CLICK HERE.' - *click* - 'Sorry. Your operating system has not been installed yet. Please wait.'
It has the same miserable file selector dialog as the X11 version! Won't those monkeys ever realize what a barrier to adoption that thing is? It was behind the times they moment they wrote it.
Indeed. A new file selector is in the works. In the meantime, discover the nice tab-completion feature. While I certainly agree there is room for improvement and definitely wouldn't suggest the file selector to my grandmother, I save/open files faster with the GTK dialog than any other I've used.
The screenshots look awful like the good old Turbo Pascal (circa 1990 or so) text-mode GUI library.
It uses ncurses, which originated in 1982.
There are some stats (look for the pretty pie charts) which can help explain the percentage, along with a few key thoughts and speculations:
Yeah, I was about to post about Half-Life myself. It does have relatively complex controls. But everything is brought in so smoothly that it never overwhelms.
:).
And teleporters and the "long jump" only came in about 2/3 of the way through the game. Weapons were spread out perfectly... that game was good
Lots of games seem to throw in the Tutorial and intro levels as an afterthought. It's easy to spot the difference between, say, Return to Castle Wolfenstein (a typical shooter) and Max Payne (an original shooter with a great tutorial).
Now a totally different topic: Anybody else notice KDE/GNOME comparisons? Complex games compared to simple ones?
If they hadn't, Microsoft simply wouldn't have supported PNG at all.
Is that really any better than their current support? As a web developer, I'd have been able to save a lot of effort if PNG support had simply been nonexistent, instead of again and again finding black backgrounds, white backgrounds, horrible dithering, and hundreds of other glitches. If you want IE compliance, your pngs have to be exactly like gifs except sometimes smaller.
You forgot: "Epiphany is coded by a bunch of assholes."
Which is funny, because it was forked by Galeon's original author....
Or rather, it was dishonest.
And this isn't? The article goes on to say, "Kremen could recall only one case where a plaintiff brought a copyright infringement action against Microsoft's customers rather than the multi-billion dollar company. (In that case, IBM and Microsoft actually picked up the defense anyway and obtained a verdict in favor of their customers)."
In other words, this move of theirs costs them nothing. Not a penny. In my opinion, it's as coincidental as Microsoft's paying an undisclosed sum in licensing fees to SCO when the whole SCO-Linux thing started.
It's just another way to spread FUD.
More likely there's no commerical demand for linux drivers so the corporate developers are told not to invest time in them. Open Source developers choose where to invest their time - corporates are told where.
That does make sense, but doesn't explain why they withhold specs. They do it because they think it gives them an edge over competition, which is simply wrong. I for one trust open-source drivers much more than regular ones, and would choose an open-specs chip over a closed one.
As much as I love glib, gtk and QT, I think other projects are in less healthy financial situations: the dependencies idea would give most money to ancient, established libraries.
Of course, I'm too tired to think of a better model. An 80-20 split?
If they had not released the source would buy their products again...
If they had not released the source, they would be breaking the law. The world is still holding its breath for the first case of the FSF kicking ass in court.
Yes, it would be nice to get the "Secret bits," like drivers, but this is actually better for the community in the long run.
This simply doesn't make sense. Large corporations hoarding "IP" is not better for the community. Unless your definition of "community" is "Linksys." Even then, it may be better for Linksys itself if it'd release 802.11g drivers. I know that I for one would buy one of their cards if they did, and since they don't I won't.
What I want, and what I know many other people want, is an 802.11g driver. Linksys has one. They choose not to release it? Not even with a proprietary license and without support, à la nVidia? I simply cannot see how that is better for the "community."
Besides, is he even the guy that makes this decision anymore?
I can just imagine Bill Gates going into work one day, looking at his company's numbers for a bit, pausing... then going to one of his accountants and asking, "Where'd that 10 billion dollars go?"