You are absolutely right, of course. I merely suggested Gentoo in particular due to the lack of binary packages that are even more likely to be configured with specific directories in mind (though I am quite sure in many cases are).
Forget the AC, try some nonfiction or perhaps some other quality fiction. unless of course you love literary elitism, in which case by all means read what he recommended.
Please explain to me how one book which explains a lot about modern culture in a new and interesting way (i.e. Cryptonomicon) despite mixed opinions on the author's writing style is inferoir to a book about a vendetta involving a whale (moby dick) or a raven who cries, "Nevermore!", both of which are considered antiquated drudgery by many?
I quite agree. the story is told through tangents. The events are merely a framework to mount them on. There is more to a story than plot...stocking fetishes, captain crunch, wisdom teeth, the Information Superhighway arguement, and so on, are called "means of getting one's ideas across". They are illustrations, if you will. How much better can some things be explained than the tangents he chose? not many. Without the analytical nature of the characters being displayed, they would be drab and lifeless. Without the Information Superhighway arguement, the chasm between education and experience would not be nearly as apparent.
So I quite agree with you. Read the book if you want more than a story, read some cliff's notes if you just want to basically know what happened.
MS may release a new OS every 3 years, but real world people upgrade every 10 or so, most sites I visit still run NT 4.0
That's blatantly misleading. NT4 is still commonly in place because of security concerns about 2000 server. now that it is becoming time-tested, they are now considering 2000 in some places, not 2003. Keep in mind, server OSes don't need the same fancy pants features desktops do.
not just funny, but true. Hell, it's not a bad idea at all. Some companies don't realize (most companies in fact) that those people they hire to work on the computers are not just there to swap out faulty hard drives. I can't help it that companies are so sold on the concept of outside sources for support that they cannot understand that their linux tech can do that. perhaps they can't bear not having something external to blame in front of shareholders.
Michael, Prince of Retarded Stories
on
Prince of Pop-ups
·
· Score: 0, Troll
If you hate retarded stories making it on the front page of slashdot, you might want to blame michael.
anyone who has taken even a basic geometry class knows how interrelated geometry and indeed paper folding in general are with geometry. however, this does not make it news for nerds, nor stuff that matters. wanker!
Exactly, I once took out 35 feet of guardrail including the posts with a police-edition crown victoria going 95 miles per hour and niether me nor the passenger were injured. Needless to say, I am a loyal fan of the Crown Victoria Police Interceptor now, and I bought another one with the insurance money.
I certainly have no problem with a person spending his own money for his own reasons, but for a movie studio to do so knowingly and passing the cost on the viewers is wrong. there is no reason to pay an actor far more than someone who works hard for a living. Same goes for athletes and other high-budget personages.
not true. if that were the case, you would hire a programmer to come make you a program for your needs rather than purchasing the information (or files/data/source/whatever). While what you said was correct, your usage of it to debunk my statement was false.
I have been saying this for years. To be honest, I blame the Montgomery GI bill. Here's why.
Before world war II, only the exceptional went to college. After world war II, the colleges were filled and most men graduated after military service. Once the jobs were filled with college people, naturally the businesses wanted to fill it with similarly educated people when they left for retirement or whatever.
Now, this is all fine and dandy up until these first-round people were off the market. These young, character-built war veterans had plenty of skill, realistic world views, and a healthy respect for the value of freedom. Enter: Baby Boom Generation, aka the mid to late sixties and early seventies.
They arrive, they hit college. Vietnam hits the fan. Suddenly we have people who haven't known reality who are now idealist with nowhere to send it but to war protests. Result: Woodstock, rise in open drug use, corrupt communes, and of course, a lead in to the seventies.
Drug use rises to an art form and kills musicians, disco takes to the night, and heroin chic rules the media. Suddenly materialism is the name of the game, and college deteriorates ever more. Eighties and nineties are full of movies glorifying drunken partying at college, so students do exactly that.
Meanwhile, over the years, schools shift gears. Suddenly sometime after the GI bill but before I started school in the eighties, grades took a turn for the worse. A meant you were doing your work rather than C, so you could get into college since GPA requirements can't go above what is possible, and C is considered to be doing badly rather than normally as it once meant (and should mean). Curriculum became based upon getting you into college rather than getting you ready for life, college, and beyond. College begins to take role as High School II to make up for lack of learning in high schools. Kids taking Math A and Math B get the same high school diploma as those who made it through pre-calc and calculus. Social skills are lost as those who are driven to madness by parents who want them to get into a good school make them feel like failures if they don't get into Harvard or Stanford or Yale or whatever.
Upon graduating from said High School II, they arrive in the workplace and are immediately demoralized by employees already there who demonstrate on a daily basis that you can get away with far less than you are capable of. Suddenly, these same lazy souls who trained them for their first job has set a pattern for future jobs of the trainee, and thus starts the cycle all over again.
Granted there are a lot of variables I didn't cover, but I tried to hit the main ones.
No social or economic system can exist when a contract isn't binding - the fundamental precondition for any human collaboration is mutual trust. If there is no license, then we call that "public domain".
well, as I have stated many a time on this site, i fully support an all-public domain information policy, and have for years. I don't consider an economic system built on information and data to be moral. That is why I use as little as possible of such in this day and age, and when I do, I try to support those who don't abuse such, like O'Reilly books and GPL software.
Well, while I don't completely agree with you, you do have a number of valid points. However, it is my opinion that your examples for the most part are irrelevant. Why is it wrong for Linus to have a day job?
Why is it wrong to not care if the Matrix sequel and other huge media pieces get created? Mass media is far from a vital resource or necessity. I think it is a fantastic waste of resources to spend millions of dollars making a movie.
To use your CPU example, the design is of little value without it actually being produced. your statement that "we understand that the "means of production" are owned by the people who carry it around inside their skulls." is false for the reason that the means of production are the way of manufacture, and the way of manufacture includes partially the concept but requires implementation to be of any real value.
Your final paragraph was merely capitalization upon my statement that unless entering into a discussion about how it could seriously be put into place in some way, it is pointless to flesh out such a system. The biggest problem would be of course transition. While it would be possible to form such a system previous to today's media-saturated world, it would be very difficult to change things in a way that would be successful in one fell swoop. It would be a slow and tedious process, which I personally do not know all the details of how it would have to happen. That is what I meant.
But the value was in the mind of the individuals, not in the muscles of the masses.
This is true, but once you let it out of your mind, it loses its value. If I play a song on my guitar, are the soundwaves not there for everyone in earshot to hear? same goes for any other form of information. You cannot go mow the lawn in the park and claim ownership over it because you mowed it, nor can you claim ownership (except by way of oppression) over information you put where others can see.
you're absolutely right. While a group (not even necessarily just companies) may need a specialist for some tasks, a person who learns quickly and is capable of many tasks is far more useful, and particularly more cost efficient. a lot of people just got too used to the easy life in dot coms i guess.
One of the biggest lies the corporations ever sold us was that everything useful a person can do is an industry. Is music an industry? no, it is entertainment. Is information an industry? no, it is knowledge. Is entertainment an industry? no, it is a diversion. Is there an industry based in every one of these? yes. Should there be? not necessarily.
They may be nice to have and convenient at that, but they are in no way vital to have them as money-driven gargantuan machines.
Examples of true industry: textiles. metal. machinery. transportation. food.
Examples of false industry: information. music, movies, and other media.
While software has proven itself to be like unto machinery, the fact that there are so many people doing it for free and giving the fruits of their labors away proves that anything infinitely dispersable without loss to the original provider cannot be a true industry without having to actually produce the object being sold. Linus Torvalds created the Linux kernel, but if I copy it and give it to a friend, Linus has lost nothing. If I have a wooden box and I copy it and give it away, I have lost the cost of the wood. That is the difference. I know there are holes in my arguement, but thats where semantics come in and I generally ignore semantics when they are placed on an idealistic level anyhow. Until a serious discussion on the subject takes place, there isn't any point in bothering with them.
actually, I find that one of the big problems in the US is mislabeling what should be called "Nationalism" as "Patriotism". A patriot stands up against his government when it does wrong, but loves his countrymen above the government. A nationalist does whatever the government compels him to. Nationalism was big in Germany in the thirties I hear. These are sad times for the true American patriot.
Slashdot Mirror
You are absolutely right, of course. I merely suggested Gentoo in particular due to the lack of binary packages that are even more likely to be configured with specific directories in mind (though I am quite sure in many cases are).
Forget the AC, try some nonfiction or perhaps some other quality fiction. unless of course you love literary elitism, in which case by all means read what he recommended.
Please explain to me how one book which explains a lot about modern culture in a new and interesting way (i.e. Cryptonomicon) despite mixed opinions on the author's writing style is inferoir to a book about a vendetta involving a whale (moby dick) or a raven who cries, "Nevermore!", both of which are considered antiquated drudgery by many?
I quite agree. the story is told through tangents. The events are merely a framework to mount them on. There is more to a story than plot...stocking fetishes, captain crunch, wisdom teeth, the Information Superhighway arguement, and so on, are called "means of getting one's ideas across". They are illustrations, if you will. How much better can some things be explained than the tangents he chose? not many. Without the analytical nature of the characters being displayed, they would be drab and lifeless. Without the Information Superhighway arguement, the chasm between education and experience would not be nearly as apparent.
So I quite agree with you. Read the book if you want more than a story, read some cliff's notes if you just want to basically know what happened.
Well, the author does ^_^
MS may release a new OS every 3 years, but real world people upgrade every 10 or so, most sites I visit still run NT 4.0
That's blatantly misleading. NT4 is still commonly in place because of security concerns about 2000 server. now that it is becoming time-tested, they are now considering 2000 in some places, not 2003. Keep in mind, server OSes don't need the same fancy pants features desktops do.
not just funny, but true. Hell, it's not a bad idea at all. Some companies don't realize (most companies in fact) that those people they hire to work on the computers are not just there to swap out faulty hard drives. I can't help it that companies are so sold on the concept of outside sources for support that they cannot understand that their linux tech can do that. perhaps they can't bear not having something external to blame in front of shareholders.
If you hate retarded stories making it on the front page of slashdot, you might want to blame michael.
anyone who has taken even a basic geometry class knows how interrelated geometry and indeed paper folding in general are with geometry. however, this does not make it news for nerds, nor stuff that matters. wanker!
Exactly, I once took out 35 feet of guardrail including the posts with a police-edition crown victoria going 95 miles per hour and niether me nor the passenger were injured. Needless to say, I am a loyal fan of the Crown Victoria Police Interceptor now, and I bought another one with the insurance money.
i worked there at the time and all we did was deal with the fact that Corpnet sucked even worse than normal for a while. (that and grumble and bitch.)
I certainly have no problem with a person spending his own money for his own reasons, but for a movie studio to do so knowingly and passing the cost on the viewers is wrong. there is no reason to pay an actor far more than someone who works hard for a living. Same goes for athletes and other high-budget personages.
not true. if that were the case, you would hire a programmer to come make you a program for your needs rather than purchasing the information (or files/data/source/whatever). While what you said was correct, your usage of it to debunk my statement was false.
I can only sit in horror as I realize the idiocy that is to come once Stallman gets a Laotian dictionary and find their word for "GNU/Laonix".
I have been saying this for years. To be honest, I blame the Montgomery GI bill. Here's why.
Before world war II, only the exceptional went to college. After world war II, the colleges were filled and most men graduated after military service. Once the jobs were filled with college people, naturally the businesses wanted to fill it with similarly educated people when they left for retirement or whatever.
Now, this is all fine and dandy up until these first-round people were off the market. These young, character-built war veterans had plenty of skill, realistic world views, and a healthy respect for the value of freedom. Enter: Baby Boom Generation, aka the mid to late sixties and early seventies.
They arrive, they hit college. Vietnam hits the fan. Suddenly we have people who haven't known reality who are now idealist with nowhere to send it but to war protests. Result: Woodstock, rise in open drug use, corrupt communes, and of course, a lead in to the seventies.
Drug use rises to an art form and kills musicians, disco takes to the night, and heroin chic rules the media. Suddenly materialism is the name of the game, and college deteriorates ever more. Eighties and nineties are full of movies glorifying drunken partying at college, so students do exactly that.
Meanwhile, over the years, schools shift gears. Suddenly sometime after the GI bill but before I started school in the eighties, grades took a turn for the worse. A meant you were doing your work rather than C, so you could get into college since GPA requirements can't go above what is possible, and C is considered to be doing badly rather than normally as it once meant (and should mean). Curriculum became based upon getting you into college rather than getting you ready for life, college, and beyond. College begins to take role as High School II to make up for lack of learning in high schools. Kids taking Math A and Math B get the same high school diploma as those who made it through pre-calc and calculus. Social skills are lost as those who are driven to madness by parents who want them to get into a good school make them feel like failures if they don't get into Harvard or Stanford or Yale or whatever.
Upon graduating from said High School II, they arrive in the workplace and are immediately demoralized by employees already there who demonstrate on a daily basis that you can get away with far less than you are capable of. Suddenly, these same lazy souls who trained them for their first job has set a pattern for future jobs of the trainee, and thus starts the cycle all over again.
Granted there are a lot of variables I didn't cover, but I tried to hit the main ones.
he realized that yesterday it was his turn and the dog fucked him.
thanks...you too.
nah...who needs to burn like that when I just like to troll when i want to, and flame Michael whenever he posts a retarded story (i.e. daily)
lose the nuts, wanker. Your genes spreading wouldnt be funny.
I am too, but having the physical book convenient is worth $5 at the local book liquidator.
No social or economic system can exist when a contract isn't binding - the fundamental precondition for any human collaboration is mutual trust. If there is no license, then we call that "public domain".
well, as I have stated many a time on this site, i fully support an all-public domain information policy, and have for years. I don't consider an economic system built on information and data to be moral. That is why I use as little as possible of such in this day and age, and when I do, I try to support those who don't abuse such, like O'Reilly books and GPL software.
go fuck yourself, troll
this is put well. To simply put my agreement into a paraphrase:
to be truly effective in computers, you must have wider views than just computers.
Well, while I don't completely agree with you, you do have a number of valid points. However, it is my opinion that your examples for the most part are irrelevant. Why is it wrong for Linus to have a day job?
Why is it wrong to not care if the Matrix sequel and other huge media pieces get created? Mass media is far from a vital resource or necessity. I think it is a fantastic waste of resources to spend millions of dollars making a movie.
To use your CPU example, the design is of little value without it actually being produced. your statement that "we understand that the "means of production" are owned by the people who carry it around inside their skulls." is false for the reason that the means of production are the way of manufacture, and the way of manufacture includes partially the concept but requires implementation to be of any real value.
Your final paragraph was merely capitalization upon my statement that unless entering into a discussion about how it could seriously be put into place in some way, it is pointless to flesh out such a system. The biggest problem would be of course transition. While it would be possible to form such a system previous to today's media-saturated world, it would be very difficult to change things in a way that would be successful in one fell swoop. It would be a slow and tedious process, which I personally do not know all the details of how it would have to happen. That is what I meant.
But the value was in the mind of the individuals, not in the muscles of the masses.
This is true, but once you let it out of your mind, it loses its value. If I play a song on my guitar, are the soundwaves not there for everyone in earshot to hear? same goes for any other form of information. You cannot go mow the lawn in the park and claim ownership over it because you mowed it, nor can you claim ownership (except by way of oppression) over information you put where others can see.
you're absolutely right. While a group (not even necessarily just companies) may need a specialist for some tasks, a person who learns quickly and is capable of many tasks is far more useful, and particularly more cost efficient. a lot of people just got too used to the easy life in dot coms i guess.
sort of. Should it be? probably.
One of the biggest lies the corporations ever sold us was that everything useful a person can do is an industry. Is music an industry? no, it is entertainment. Is information an industry? no, it is knowledge. Is entertainment an industry? no, it is a diversion. Is there an industry based in every one of these? yes. Should there be? not necessarily.
They may be nice to have and convenient at that, but they are in no way vital to have them as money-driven gargantuan machines.
Examples of true industry: textiles. metal. machinery. transportation. food.
Examples of false industry: information. music, movies, and other media.
While software has proven itself to be like unto machinery, the fact that there are so many people doing it for free and giving the fruits of their labors away proves that anything infinitely dispersable without loss to the original provider cannot be a true industry without having to actually produce the object being sold. Linus Torvalds created the Linux kernel, but if I copy it and give it to a friend, Linus has lost nothing. If I have a wooden box and I copy it and give it away, I have lost the cost of the wood. That is the difference. I know there are holes in my arguement, but thats where semantics come in and I generally ignore semantics when they are placed on an idealistic level anyhow. Until a serious discussion on the subject takes place, there isn't any point in bothering with them.
actually, I find that one of the big problems in the US is mislabeling what should be called "Nationalism" as "Patriotism". A patriot stands up against his government when it does wrong, but loves his countrymen above the government. A nationalist does whatever the government compels him to. Nationalism was big in Germany in the thirties I hear. These are sad times for the true American patriot.