I was really trying to figure out what Aliens, Hairdos and Weapons had to do with Enterprise-level software. I can't figure out if that's a good thing or not.
I'm a very happy Slackware user, but it's attitudes like yours that prevent Linux from competing effectively on the desktop. Your amazing arrogance and ignorance really shines through and demonstrates that nothing matters to you but your ability to say, "I'm a l33t linux hacker wannabe". Apparently, you care nothing about the very philosophy that brought Linux to the forefront, which is freedom for the users -- not the developers. I don't even think it's necessary for me to explain the enormous benefits of a widespread userbase for Linux, but if you're unable to comprehend such a concept, this discussion is pointless, anyway. On another note, I am currently involved in a project, soon to be announced, which proposes to make people such as you irrelevant by not only talking about what ails Linux (instead of ignoring issues like you), but also producing a distro that doesn't suck.
1: the stuff he says on the first page is basically a bunch of static linkx that can be done easily.
The static links can be done quite easily and should be, but are not. You haven't made a point here.
2: You cannot have a Gentoo style community unless you are a distro that caters to people who are willing to go to great lengths to learn more about their OS and computer hardware.
That explains why Redhat pretty much owns the commercial Linux market and thereby has the largest community, right? Because they make it a pain to use your computer by wasting all your time just trying to get everything compiled? Or was it, perhaps, that they made an attempt to make their product as unhostile to users as they knew how?
3: the one desktop environment is stupid. Thats one of the reasons I switched from windows, that their desktop environment is idiotic, especially in the same paragraph as talking about how linux offers choice.
If this distro were to only come with KDE, there is nothing keeping a user from installing GNOME or any other desktop environment, but it certainly avoids confusion for people that don't need or want the choice. There is such a thing as too many choices interfering with productivity, and believe it or not, most people have a computer to be productive -- not to proclaim their Gentoo l33tness on Slashdot.
4: installers are not necessary. try making a gui frontend to Gentoo's emerge/portage if you want a good install system. Not only does it download and update, but it also works. really well.
Really? I'm at a loss as to how you came to this conclusion after millions and possibly billions of dollars in marketing research from several major software manufacturers have determined otherwise. Most people don't like to waste all their time compiling. We have jobs, you know.
5: this asshat cannot spell bruce perens' last name. I am supposed to trust him with my OS? *cackles*
I was wondering how you were able to speak with such authority on Linux usability. Then I realized it was because you in all your glory were able to spell Bruce Perens' name.
not to echo Linus or anything, he sounds like his objective os to combat microsoft on the desktop. I think personally that it is far better to exceed or be superior to Microsoft for technical reasons more than market share reasons. Besides...last time I checked the average non-poweruser on windows is just as lost as they would be in KDE, for example, if not more. And were said powerusers not almost all gamers, they'd likely find KDE superior if they gave it a chance (to compare similar DE's).
That is barely coherent, but I'm going to try to respond to it anyway. Of course this make-believe distro has the objective of competing with Windows on the desktop, and of course it's better to exceed the standards set by Microsoft, but at this point Linux on the desktop needs to just reach the same level. You already trying to abolish simple installations, and you think your insight will enable Linux to gain any kind of marketshare over Windows?
The reason the government doesn't like phrases like "sex workers", "anal sex" and "men who sleep with men" is because they indicate that AIDS discriminates, which is not what the government would like you to believe. If people stopped doing the things that spread AIDS (it's not exactly airborne), it would eventually go away. Consequently, politicians and activist groups would lose a manipulation tool to siphon tax dollars away from issues that are a lot less preventable and affect more people.
I'm not trying to troll, but it's just common sense that if you're concerned about the risks that come with an activity, you either don't participate in that activity or you (not your fellow citizens) accept the risks. You like Big Macs? You accept the risk of clogged arteries. You like to smoke? You accept the risk of lung cancer. You like games on Windows? You accept the risk of Outlook viruses. You like sex with prostitutes? You accept the risk of AIDS. Even my dog understands that there are consequences for certain actions.
That would require an amazing amount of government surveillance to ensure that we were all seeking the same purpose. Fortunately, the US was founded on individualist principles which make it next to impossible to completely fulfill your "Slavery is Freedom" vision. However, if you're going to really do the job right, you're going to need the right weaponry, such as laser rifles, to point at the people that would rather pursue their own dreams instead of yours.
I know that you're going to be shocked by this, but many Iraqis are opposed to your vision, and are thankful that the US military is able to squash the tyrant and free their homeland. If war accomplished nothing, slavery might still exist in the Confederate States of America, the French would be German, all of Korea would be under Kim Jong Il's control, and Kuwait would be part of Iraq.
From http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0314/hentoff.ph p [QUOTE] In The Guardian, a British paper that can hardly be characterized as conservative, there was a dispatch from Safwan, Iraq, liberated in the first days of the war: "Ajami Saadoun Khilis, whose son and brother were executed under the Saddam regime, sobbed like a child on the shoulder of The Guardian's Egyptian translator. He mopped the tears but they kept coming. 'You just arrived,' he said. 'You're late. What took you so long?' " [ENDQUOTE]
The same article goes on to say: [QUOTE] The letters section of The New York Times is sometimes more penetrating than the editorials. A March 23 letter from Lawrence Borok: "As someone who was very active in the [anti-Vietnam War] protests, I think that the antiwar activists are totally wrong on this one. Granted, President Bush's insensitive policies in many areas dear to liberals (I am one) naturally make me suspicious of his motives. But even if he's doing it for all the wrong reasons, have they all forgotten about the Iraqi people?" [ENDQUOTE]
Stop rioting for peace through appeasement, and help free the Iraqis, so they can have the medicine, food and peace that you and I enjoy and take for granted. The protests do nothing but boost the morale of the tyrant who is preventing the very vision you lay out of peace, feeding the hungry and curing disease.
The only downside is that it doesn't validate. Boohoo.
How can ESPN.com be touted as a site that is "saving bandwidth through standards compliance" when they're not standards compliant? It's possible to do all the absolute-positioning and other CSS tricks without making the site completely standards non-compliant.
I think the intentions are noble (encouraging upgrades to compliant browsers, reducing page weight with less code), but it seems like somebody didn't finish the job. That's fine if that's what they want to do, of course, but the behavior shouldn't be acclaimed as something other web developers should duplicate.
I don't see any clarification on the matter at the post, so I'm wondering if this feature is to be included on every platform that Mozilla supports, and if so, just how difficult it is to have ActiveX on non-Windows systems. Also, what kind of security issues are involved?
Those are the two things everyone has to do to be happy.
1) Be thankful that you have a job at all. There are a lot of guys that would kill for your job right now -- even if it's not exactly fun.
2) Be patient and wait for the economy to pick up. It HAS to pick up at some point.
Being thankful and patient are a choice. They are contagious, and when you, as an individual, apply them to your own job, your co-workers will eventually pick up on it as well. Conversely, if you choose to complain and make that the norm, your co-workers will also pick up on that and morale will suffer accordingly.
Psychological Effects of Media Glitz
on
Strike on Iraq
·
· Score: 1
Of course war is no joke, but what if the media glitz is part of the psychological battle with Iraq in attempt to demean them and weaken their staying power? If the Iraqi army doesn't fight, this whole thing will be over relatively quickly and with much less bloodshed.
I'm not saying that's definitely the case, but it seems like an interesting and real possiblity.
Microsoft has as much of monopoly as the consumers and vendors let them. If you don't like them having so much control, then stop buying their product or supporting vendors that buy their product. That includes copying your friend's Office XP CD that he got from work.
I'm sure this will be moderated as flamebait, but the fact remains that the consumers made their choice whether they like it now or not, and there is no reason Microsoft should be punished because their marketing works too well. This is something every one of Microsoft's competitors, including Corel, needs to learn. The quality of the product means nothing if you can't market it properly. Microsoft's products are on many levels inferior to those of their competitor's, but their marketing is second to none and they will pretty much call the shots until the rest of the software industry learns how to play the game.
If the consumer doesn't like IE being bundled with Windows, let them prove it by buying and using other software. If competitors want to gain a larger marketshare, let them innovate instead of whining. It's not like they're competing against quality software.
Microsoft claims that the name is being changed to reflect the fact that Microsoft is 'embracing this technology in terms of folding it into Windows for the next decade.'
I find it simultaneously amusing and annoying that Microsoft will still be in business for the next decade, thus having that much more time to make our IT lives a living hell with even more codenamed software to trample over privacy rights and innovation in the name of protecting privacy rights and innovation.
Is there any possible way to give individuals as many unique identification numbers as needed for either phone lines or for IPs without having to revamp the system very few years? Eventually this 11-digit system won't be enough, and eventually IPv6, although less likely, won't be enough, right? So, is it mathematically possible to create a system with the structure necessary and still have infinite combinations?
It just seems that this is an issue that could be avoided with a little foresight and one more major revamp.
On LawMeme, Ernest Miller says this about the "God's Machine" quote:
This gives me an idea. Perhaps we should start a fund to buy every member of Congress a TiVo or, preferably, a ReplayTV. If enough money is raised, perhaps one device for every member of the federal judiciary as well, at least the appellate level.
Apologies if this has been posted already, but I couldn't find it anywhere on here.
Slashdot Mirror
I was really trying to figure out what Aliens, Hairdos and Weapons had to do with Enterprise-level software. I can't figure out if that's a good thing or not.
I'm a very happy Slackware user, but it's attitudes like yours that prevent Linux from competing effectively on the desktop. Your amazing arrogance and ignorance really shines through and demonstrates that nothing matters to you but your ability to say, "I'm a l33t linux hacker wannabe". Apparently, you care nothing about the very philosophy that brought Linux to the forefront, which is freedom for the users -- not the developers. I don't even think it's necessary for me to explain the enormous benefits of a widespread userbase for Linux, but if you're unable to comprehend such a concept, this discussion is pointless, anyway. On another note, I am currently involved in a project, soon to be announced, which proposes to make people such as you irrelevant by not only talking about what ails Linux (instead of ignoring issues like you), but also producing a distro that doesn't suck.
1: the stuff he says on the first page is basically a bunch of static linkx that can be done easily.
The static links can be done quite easily and should be, but are not. You haven't made a point here.
2: You cannot have a Gentoo style community unless you are a distro that caters to people who are willing to go to great lengths to learn more about their OS and computer hardware.
That explains why Redhat pretty much owns the commercial Linux market and thereby has the largest community, right? Because they make it a pain to use your computer by wasting all your time just trying to get everything compiled? Or was it, perhaps, that they made an attempt to make their product as unhostile to users as they knew how?
3: the one desktop environment is stupid. Thats one of the reasons I switched from windows, that their desktop environment is idiotic, especially in the same paragraph as talking about how linux offers choice.
If this distro were to only come with KDE, there is nothing keeping a user from installing GNOME or any other desktop environment, but it certainly avoids confusion for people that don't need or want the choice. There is such a thing as too many choices interfering with productivity, and believe it or not, most people have a computer to be productive -- not to proclaim their Gentoo l33tness on Slashdot.
4: installers are not necessary. try making a gui frontend to Gentoo's emerge/portage if you want a good install system. Not only does it download and update, but it also works. really well.
Really? I'm at a loss as to how you came to this conclusion after millions and possibly billions of dollars in marketing research from several major software manufacturers have determined otherwise. Most people don't like to waste all their time compiling. We have jobs, you know.
5: this asshat cannot spell bruce perens' last name. I am supposed to trust him with my OS? *cackles*
I was wondering how you were able to speak with such authority on Linux usability. Then I realized it was because you in all your glory were able to spell Bruce Perens' name.
not to echo Linus or anything, he sounds like his objective os to combat microsoft on the desktop. I think personally that it is far better to exceed or be superior to Microsoft for technical reasons more than market share reasons. Besides...last time I checked the average non-poweruser on windows is just as lost as they would be in KDE, for example, if not more. And were said powerusers not almost all gamers, they'd likely find KDE superior if they gave it a chance (to compare similar DE's).
That is barely coherent, but I'm going to try to respond to it anyway. Of course this make-believe distro has the objective of competing with Windows on the desktop, and of course it's better to exceed the standards set by Microsoft, but at this point Linux on the desktop needs to just reach the same level. You already trying to abolish simple installations, and you think your insight will enable Linux to gain any kind of marketshare over Windows?
my $.02
Absolutely worthless.
...is like going to war without France.
Yeah, flamebait. It's a joke kids.
The reason the government doesn't like phrases like "sex workers", "anal sex" and "men who sleep with men" is because they indicate that AIDS discriminates, which is not what the government would like you to believe. If people stopped doing the things that spread AIDS (it's not exactly airborne), it would eventually go away. Consequently, politicians and activist groups would lose a manipulation tool to siphon tax dollars away from issues that are a lot less preventable and affect more people.
I'm not trying to troll, but it's just common sense that if you're concerned about the risks that come with an activity, you either don't participate in that activity or you (not your fellow citizens) accept the risks. You like Big Macs? You accept the risk of clogged arteries. You like to smoke? You accept the risk of lung cancer. You like games on Windows? You accept the risk of Outlook viruses. You like sex with prostitutes? You accept the risk of AIDS. Even my dog understands that there are consequences for certain actions.
from the American public's propensity to elect the worst candidates
Even worse, they even re-elect them!
If so, check out LifeGem as a source for your diamond. No, it's not necessarily cheap, but it makes the subject more pertinent to this site.
I don't have any favorites, but DMOZ has a huge selection of kid-specific links here.
Putting a piece of cheese at one end of the maze of cubes is a good way to make it suck more.
That would require an amazing amount of government surveillance to ensure that we were all seeking the same purpose. Fortunately, the US was founded on individualist principles which make it next to impossible to completely fulfill your "Slavery is Freedom" vision. However, if you're going to really do the job right, you're going to need the right weaponry, such as laser rifles, to point at the people that would rather pursue their own dreams instead of yours.
h p
I know that you're going to be shocked by this, but many Iraqis are opposed to your vision, and are thankful that the US military is able to squash the tyrant and free their homeland. If war accomplished nothing, slavery might still exist in the Confederate States of America, the French would be German, all of Korea would be under Kim Jong Il's control, and Kuwait would be part of Iraq.
From http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0314/hentoff.p
[QUOTE]
In The Guardian, a British paper that can hardly be characterized as conservative, there was a dispatch from Safwan, Iraq, liberated in the first days of the war: "Ajami Saadoun Khilis, whose son and brother were executed under the Saddam regime, sobbed like a child on the shoulder of The Guardian's Egyptian translator. He mopped the tears but they kept coming. 'You just arrived,' he said. 'You're late. What took you so long?' "
[ENDQUOTE]
The same article goes on to say:
[QUOTE]
The letters section of The New York Times is sometimes more penetrating than the editorials. A March 23 letter from Lawrence Borok: "As someone who was very active in the [anti-Vietnam War] protests, I think that the antiwar activists are totally wrong on this one. Granted, President Bush's insensitive policies in many areas dear to liberals (I am one) naturally make me suspicious of his motives. But even if he's doing it for all the wrong reasons, have they all forgotten about the Iraqi people?"
[ENDQUOTE]
Stop rioting for peace through appeasement, and help free the Iraqis, so they can have the medicine, food and peace that you and I enjoy and take for granted. The protests do nothing but boost the morale of the tyrant who is preventing the very vision you lay out of peace, feeding the hungry and curing disease.
The only downside is that it doesn't validate. Boohoo.
How can ESPN.com be touted as a site that is "saving bandwidth through standards compliance" when they're not standards compliant? It's possible to do all the absolute-positioning and other CSS tricks without making the site completely standards non-compliant.
I think the intentions are noble (encouraging upgrades to compliant browsers, reducing page weight with less code), but it seems like somebody didn't finish the job. That's fine if that's what they want to do, of course, but the behavior shouldn't be acclaimed as something other web developers should duplicate.
I don't see any clarification on the matter at the post, so I'm wondering if this feature is to be included on every platform that Mozilla supports, and if so, just how difficult it is to have ActiveX on non-Windows systems. Also, what kind of security issues are involved?
Those are the two things everyone has to do to be happy.
1) Be thankful that you have a job at all. There are a lot of guys that would kill for your job right now -- even if it's not exactly fun.
2) Be patient and wait for the economy to pick up. It HAS to pick up at some point.
Being thankful and patient are a choice. They are contagious, and when you, as an individual, apply them to your own job, your co-workers will eventually pick up on it as well. Conversely, if you choose to complain and make that the norm, your co-workers will also pick up on that and morale will suffer accordingly.
Of course war is no joke, but what if the media glitz is part of the psychological battle with Iraq in attempt to demean them and weaken their staying power? If the Iraqi army doesn't fight, this whole thing will be over relatively quickly and with much less bloodshed.
I'm not saying that's definitely the case, but it seems like an interesting and real possiblity.
Microsoft has as much of monopoly as the consumers and vendors let them. If you don't like them having so much control, then stop buying their product or supporting vendors that buy their product. That includes copying your friend's Office XP CD that he got from work.
I'm sure this will be moderated as flamebait, but the fact remains that the consumers made their choice whether they like it now or not, and there is no reason Microsoft should be punished because their marketing works too well. This is something every one of Microsoft's competitors, including Corel, needs to learn. The quality of the product means nothing if you can't market it properly. Microsoft's products are on many levels inferior to those of their competitor's, but their marketing is second to none and they will pretty much call the shots until the rest of the software industry learns how to play the game.
If the consumer doesn't like IE being bundled with Windows, let them prove it by buying and using other software. If competitors want to gain a larger marketshare, let them innovate instead of whining. It's not like they're competing against quality software.
I wrote an app for a client to handle contact forms a bit like FormMail in PHP that I named Phirst Contact.
Microsoft claims that the name is being changed to reflect the fact that Microsoft is 'embracing this technology in terms of folding it into Windows for the next decade.'
I find it simultaneously amusing and annoying that Microsoft will still be in business for the next decade, thus having that much more time to make our IT lives a living hell with even more codenamed software to trample over privacy rights and innovation in the name of protecting privacy rights and innovation.
Is there any possible way to give individuals as many unique identification numbers as needed for either phone lines or for IPs without having to revamp the system very few years? Eventually this 11-digit system won't be enough, and eventually IPv6, although less likely, won't be enough, right? So, is it mathematically possible to create a system with the structure necessary and still have infinite combinations?
It just seems that this is an issue that could be avoided with a little foresight and one more major revamp.
irc.freenode.net #slackware has a lot of very friendly and helpful regulars.
to survival of the fittest?
If an animal goes extinct for any reason, doesn't that just mean it wasn't "fittest"?
but if you already know the key is C, C# is not a good note to hit.
:)
Tell that to any of the jazz guys that like the sound of a flat-9.
Yeah, offtopic. Who cares?
Competition is bad for consumers.
On LawMeme, Ernest Miller says this about the "God's Machine" quote:
This gives me an idea. Perhaps we should start a fund to buy every member of Congress a TiVo or, preferably, a ReplayTV. If enough money is raised, perhaps one device for every member of the federal judiciary as well, at least the appellate level.
Apologies if this has been posted already, but I couldn't find it anywhere on here.
"FreeBSD swiftly updated CVS"
I love open-source.
See my editorial related to this topic, rather than me saying the same thing here. :)