The anglos didn't "bend over" for the French because they felt bad about 1759...the fact is, unless they wanted a full-scale rebellion on their hands, they needed to accomodate the large francophone population. They didn't want another Ireland on their hands.
That didn't prevent a mob of angry anglo-montrealers to burn down Canada's first parliament while it was in session (what a wonderful expression of the democratic spirit) to protest against justified reparations payments to farmers whose livelihoods had be wrongfully destroyed during the repression of the 1837-1839 uprising. Perhaps if you actually tried to learn Canada's history instead of spouting off derogatory half-truths and bigoted innuendos (a minority smaller than other minorities?) then you'd have some credibility on this issue.
Re:Play your strengths, cover your weaknesses...
on
WineX 3.0 Examined
·
· Score: 1
I play in windowed mode, disable DXGrab - it stays grabbed during the game anyway - and then pause the game in order to get the cursor back. I can then click my way to the mail program and back, then click on "resume" to start playing again. I haven't tried Alt-Tabbing in a while, but I do recall there were some problems there.
On the other hand, with each new iteration WineX supports an increasing number of games, simply because they improve compatibility with the API. One could also make the case that the PC is a poor platform for gaming, because there are a lot more quality games available for consoles than for PCs...I don't necessarily agree with this, but it is basically the same argument.
Under Linux
Buy WineX subscription
Download binaries
Install them
Insert CD of supported game
type "winex3 [path to installer]"
Game installs, icons are created in K menu
Click on icon, play game
Get in fight w/ girlfriend for playing eight hours straight on your favorite supported game
OR
Install the new point'n'click thingy from Transgaming
Point and click on pretty widgets
Play game
Cut yourself off from the rest of the world until you pass out from lack of food
Enough with the FUD already!
Re:Play your strengths, cover your weaknesses...
on
WineX 3.0 Examined
·
· Score: 1
I consider myself a pretty hardcore Counter-Strike player...not very good, perhaps, but hardcore nonetheless. I play it on Windows at work (during lunchbreak) and on Linux at home - where as a bonus I can check my mail and whatnot without disconnecting from my game...
"I don't plan on using Wine at all so long as it's easier to play the games on my partition."
Actually - depending on the game you want to play, of course - it is easier to play the (supported) games with WineX 3 than dual-booting. Easy as in "click on the menu item." How easier can it get?
"For CPU intensive games, the OS is even in the way, hurting performance. Yes, Linux as well, albeit maybe marginally less than Windows."
Also, in Linux, you can run a "barebones" Windows Manager (twm, blackbox, WindowMaker, etc.) when you play games in order to minimize use of resources - this can give an extra performance edge against Windows.
"There is a reason you don't find many games under Linux. Graphic card drivers are much better optimized for Windows systems."
Well, that depends on the video card. For NVIDIA cards, the Linux drivers are as optimized as the Windows ones. It's the ATI ones that lag behind, IIRC.
"France was not part of the Soviet bloc. Allende was."
Yeah, sure.
"if Allende had his way Chile would have become another Cuba"
Again, there is no proof of that, nor any indications that this is indeed what would have had happened. You can't justify a non-democratic coup in hindsight with "what ifs," especially when they're just based on right-wing propaganda.
"along with all the human rights abuses that leftists never seem to condemn because they love Castro"
I disagree with the latest crackdown on dissidents in Cuba, and I do think that Castro should hold elections. However, according to most international monitoring groups Cuba has a much better human rights record than a lot of other South American nations (which are U.S. allies, of course). Of course, I have been in Cuba so I actually do know what I'm talking about.
Has it ever occured to you that the Sandinistas were unpopular and their defeat at the polls were caused by their decade-long reign of terror?
Except that they didn't have a decade-long reign of terror. The only terror in Nicaragua was the product of U.S-backed death squads based in Honduras (the contras), who deliberately killed peasants (as well as a clergymen) instead of Nicaraguan soldiers. There is ample documentation about this. Show me one credible source corroborating any "Sandinistan reign of terror". Just one. (By credible, I mean with sources - not just some rant from a right-wing nut.)
Nicaraguans realize that they are better off voting for a democratic coalition backed by the US
So you do admit that it was US pressure that swayed the election result.
Most regular people would dismiss you immediately for quoting zmag
Really? Funny, I never get that except with right-wingers who think Fox News is fair and accurate reporting. This is nothing but the same ole' "anything a leftist says is false, but I won't actually try to counter the arguments, I'll just attack their credibility." Well, I'll tell you this: dismissing a web site off-hand just because they have an editorial slant that does not agree with your politics is quite lame. So go read the texts and tell me exactly where the author's facts can be proven to be wrong. It's easy, they usually give out their sources. Maybe then we can continue this discussion.
Well, in that case, they should just not offer any support for it. That's seems like a simple, reasonable (and legal) proposition. Here's the product: if you don't use it within such framework, then we're not responsible if something goes wrong. Except that in this case, of course, MS isn't responsible if things go wrong even if you use the software within the suggested framework. So it is a control issue - they just want to continue to impose their monopoly, like they've done in the past.
Interesting...basically you have no proof at all to support your views and yet accuse others of "revisionism by association." Fact is, there was no indication by the Allende government that there wouldn't be free elections, while we do know that there weren't under Pinochet. So on one hand we have a scarecrow brandished by apologists for a brutal dictator, and on the other hand what really happened (i.e. a definitely non-democratic coup). Just so you know, socialists were in power in France for years, and yet there were elections (which they eventually lost).
How can we take you seriously when you affirm that Noriega was a candidate in the 1990 elections in Nicaragua - when almost anyone who knows anything about Central America knows that he wasn't. (Hint: check out Panama instead...)
Basically, the 1990 election was a sham, as the U.S. made it know that they would withdraw all help to Nicaragua if the Sandinistas (who overthrew Somoza, a brutal dictator who had the support of the U.S.) were elected again. Nicaragua couldn't stand up to the U.S., its citizens knew that very well. That's why the Sandinistas lost in 1990.
Nice rewriting of history here...in other words, you're saying that it's okay to have a military coup if a government has unpopular policies...
Well, I'm sorry to break it to you, but there was only one acceptable way to get rid of Allende if you didn't agree with him: vote him out. Now if Allende had given himself dictatorial powers, like Pinochet did, then maybe you would have a point. The fact is, despite what you think of Allende's politics (which were a lot more popular with the majority of Chileans than with the rich landowners, I'll give you that), Chile was still a democracy, because there were still going to be elections.
But you've touched on the inherent risk of democracy, that it contains the seed of its own destruction: the people can put an anti-democratic party in power if they vote so. Even in the States, with sufficient votes, it would theoretically be possible to amend the constitution in very undemocratic ways - though I doubt this would ever happen, thanks to the numerous checks and balances of the american system).
In other words, despite Dubya's warning, Iraqis could very well vote en masse for an Islamic party. That is their right. What you have to do in democratic societies is to educate the masses enough so that they don't vote for fascist/non-democratic/extremist parties. To oppose restrictions on what people can vote for is contrary to the democratic ideal, even though it does carry the risk of less democracy.
You should know that KDE 3.1 is less bloated than 2.x - it runs faster, too. Don't know about Gnome 2.x, but I've heard similar claims. On the other hand, try to run XP on that P100...:-)
Are you an idiot? Look at what the US government has done to farming and ranching? Oftentimes farmers are paid to _not_ grow anything. Government in business never works long term...
Ah, warm breeze of anonymous flames...First, who said anything about long-term? Most govt. involvement in the economy is anything but - if only because governments will sometimes cancel programs just because they were started by the previous one (if it was from the opposing party, of course). Not to mention when businessmen hold political office - Dick Cheney and Halliburton come to mind. One of the few semi-permanent govt. (and therefore, tax-funded) fixture in the american economy is the Pentagon, which has been the private sector's friend for decades. I haven't really heard about the farmers - I'd like a link, if you have one. I always like to read about bureaucratic fuck-ups. Make no mistake, though: private bureaucracies make dumb mistakes as well!
A better example is Canada's health care system. Everyone is covered, thanks to government mandate, but everyone gets the same mediocre service.
I beg to differ, having used the Canadian health care sytem on many occasions. The service is very adequate. It might not be stellar, but it sure ain't mediocre! Montreal hospitals are a bit too crowded sometimes (which is mostly due to an aging population), but there are other free services such as CLSCs (similar to community clinics). One thing is for sure: even though they sometimes gripe about it, Canadians are deeply attached to their healthcare system, and the great majority wouldn't trade it in for an american-style one - especially if they've lived in the states for a while. That should tell you something about its value! You know, free as in beer feels a small price to pay for waiting an hour more when your life isn't in danger. So is knowing that poor folks having trouble making ends meet can still get adequate care if they or their children get sick or injured. I guess that's called good old human compassion. (Which reminds me, that's a sentence we don't hear as much these days: compassionate conservatism...I wonder why?)
Even in the states, where there is at least incentive to innovate in healthcare, the government has meddled and driven up costs for everyone.
Hey, it's not because you guys didn't get it right that it means it can't work!;-) Seriously, I'd be curious to read more on this - real serious studies, not anything from a conservative think-thank (yeah, they're impartial towards government intervention...honest!). I'd be curious to see why the U.S. efforts haven't worked, while ours have. Do you suggest any particular, low-bias reading on the matter?
I disagree. In Quebec the government gave incentive for multimedia companies (and, to a lesser extent, game developers - there still needs to be some education about the distinction between the two among government officials), paying part of new employee's salaries for the first year, then a smaller part for the next five years or so. It grealy helped to spur the economy (even though the dot-com burst still affected us in the end). However, the only extent to which the government "poked their nose" was to verify that the money indeed went to new employees as salaries, and not to line the pockets of owners. I'm always puzzled by the visceral opposition people in the States have towards government intervention in business - especially considering that, without government subsidies, there would never have been a computer industry. The fact is that the three industries who've enjoyed the biggest growth (hi-tech, pharmaceutical and agriculture) are also the ones that have most benefited from government intervention (loans, tax breaks and subsidies). Also, when you consider the amount of money injected in the private sector through the Pentagon (i.e. your tax dollars at work), it's hard not to conclude that the U.S. has very interventionist economical policies. I know right-wing libertarians are going to flame me for this, but the fact is that a totally free market is an abomination that all industrialized countries abandoned since 1929 in favor of mixed economies (to varying degrees). With that in mind, I think government helping out small, independent studios (be it for games, films, art, books, etc.) is a great idea, as most of these won't be able to survive their first game, which will end up being the property of the publisher instead. Anyway, my subsidized 0.02$
Hey, I used to have one of those...
on
Barebones Notebook
·
· Score: 4, Funny
...if I remember correctly, it was called a ZX81...:-)
I think you should read that GPL again. It does not give someone the right to distribute the code (or parts of the code) in binary form, but then requires whomever distributes it to also offer the sources as well - and give credit to the original authors. They are also prohibited from not extending these same distribution rights and obligations to who get their software. So that company can use parts from the kernel, but they have to give out the sources of their software and give credit where it's due - as well as the permission to redistribute the software under the GPL. If I understand correctly, they have failed to do this.
In other words, yes, you were wrong, and have now been corrected. GPL does not mean Public Domain (even though the two share some similarities). It seems you're going to keep waiting a looong time for whatever gripe you have with the GPL to materialize.
Correction: no easy way to change resolution and color depth on-the-fly. You can easily change resolution/color depth through the distro's control panel (i.e. the Mandrake Control Panel). You just need to log off and restart X to activate the changes.
Anyway, as I said in another post, Windows and Linux/XFree86/KDE have followed different evolutions, so on-the-fly screen resolution and depth change is something that is indeed lacking from the latter (actually, the RandR extension is present in the latest versions of XFree86 - you can do it from the command line, but there's no GUI tool for it). My point, which you conveniently ignore, was that the KDE desktop, on the other hand, can do all these other things that Windows can't do by default. So, when version 3.2 comes along with the RandR control panel, the Windows Desktop won't have anything on the KDE Desktop (I won't speak for Gnome, since I'm not that familiar with the new version). You know what? I don't mind waiting a couple of months for a function I never use anyway...
Slashdot Mirror
The anglos didn't "bend over" for the French because they felt bad about 1759...the fact is, unless they wanted a full-scale rebellion on their hands, they needed to accomodate the large francophone population. They didn't want another Ireland on their hands.
That didn't prevent a mob of angry anglo-montrealers to burn down Canada's first parliament while it was in session (what a wonderful expression of the democratic spirit) to protest against justified reparations payments to farmers whose livelihoods had be wrongfully destroyed during the repression of the 1837-1839 uprising. Perhaps if you actually tried to learn Canada's history instead of spouting off derogatory half-truths and bigoted innuendos (a minority smaller than other minorities?) then you'd have some credibility on this issue.
I play in windowed mode, disable DXGrab - it stays grabbed during the game anyway - and then pause the game in order to get the cursor back. I can then click my way to the mail program and back, then click on "resume" to start playing again. I haven't tried Alt-Tabbing in a while, but I do recall there were some problems there.
On the other hand, with each new iteration WineX supports an increasing number of games, simply because they improve compatibility with the API. One could also make the case that the PC is a poor platform for gaming, because there are a lot more quality games available for consoles than for PCs...I don't necessarily agree with this, but it is basically the same argument.
Under Linux Buy WineX subscription Download binaries Install them Insert CD of supported game type "winex3 [path to installer]" Game installs, icons are created in K menu Click on icon, play game Get in fight w/ girlfriend for playing eight hours straight on your favorite supported game OR Install the new point'n'click thingy from Transgaming Point and click on pretty widgets Play game Cut yourself off from the rest of the world until you pass out from lack of food Enough with the FUD already!
I consider myself a pretty hardcore Counter-Strike player...not very good, perhaps, but hardcore nonetheless. I play it on Windows at work (during lunchbreak) and on Linux at home - where as a bonus I can check my mail and whatnot without disconnecting from my game...
"I don't plan on using Wine at all so long as it's easier to play the games on my partition."
Actually - depending on the game you want to play, of course - it is easier to play the (supported) games with WineX 3 than dual-booting. Easy as in "click on the menu item." How easier can it get?
"For CPU intensive games, the OS is even in the way, hurting performance. Yes, Linux as well, albeit maybe marginally less than Windows."
Also, in Linux, you can run a "barebones" Windows Manager (twm, blackbox, WindowMaker, etc.) when you play games in order to minimize use of resources - this can give an extra performance edge against Windows.
"There is a reason you don't find many games under Linux. Graphic card drivers are much better optimized for Windows systems."
Well, that depends on the video card. For NVIDIA cards, the Linux drivers are as optimized as the Windows ones. It's the ATI ones that lag behind, IIRC.
"France was not part of the Soviet bloc. Allende was."
Yeah, sure.
"if Allende had his way Chile would have become another Cuba"
Again, there is no proof of that, nor any indications that this is indeed what would have had happened. You can't justify a non-democratic coup in hindsight with "what ifs," especially when they're just based on right-wing propaganda.
"along with all the human rights abuses that leftists never seem to condemn because they love Castro"
I disagree with the latest crackdown on dissidents in Cuba, and I do think that Castro should hold elections. However, according to most international monitoring groups Cuba has a much better human rights record than a lot of other South American nations (which are U.S. allies, of course). Of course, I have been in Cuba so I actually do know what I'm talking about.
Has it ever occured to you that the Sandinistas were unpopular and their defeat at the polls were caused by their decade-long reign of terror?
Except that they didn't have a decade-long reign of terror. The only terror in Nicaragua was the product of U.S-backed death squads based in Honduras (the contras), who deliberately killed peasants (as well as a clergymen) instead of Nicaraguan soldiers. There is ample documentation about this. Show me one credible source corroborating any "Sandinistan reign of terror". Just one. (By credible, I mean with sources - not just some rant from a right-wing nut.)
Nicaraguans realize that they are better off voting for a democratic coalition backed by the US
So you do admit that it was US pressure that swayed the election result.
Most regular people would dismiss you immediately for quoting zmag
Really? Funny, I never get that except with right-wingers who think Fox News is fair and accurate reporting. This is nothing but the same ole' "anything a leftist says is false, but I won't actually try to counter the arguments, I'll just attack their credibility." Well, I'll tell you this: dismissing a web site off-hand just because they have an editorial slant that does not agree with your politics is quite lame. So go read the texts and tell me exactly where the author's facts can be proven to be wrong. It's easy, they usually give out their sources. Maybe then we can continue this discussion.
Well, in that case, they should just not offer any support for it. That's seems like a simple, reasonable (and legal) proposition. Here's the product: if you don't use it within such framework, then we're not responsible if something goes wrong. Except that in this case, of course, MS isn't responsible if things go wrong even if you use the software within the suggested framework. So it is a control issue - they just want to continue to impose their monopoly, like they've done in the past.
Racism is never based on truth, though it still hurts.
Gee, how more racist can you get in a single post?
Interesting...basically you have no proof at all to support your views and yet accuse others of "revisionism by association." Fact is, there was no indication by the Allende government that there wouldn't be free elections, while we do know that there weren't under Pinochet. So on one hand we have a scarecrow brandished by apologists for a brutal dictator, and on the other hand what really happened (i.e. a definitely non-democratic coup). Just so you know, socialists were in power in France for years, and yet there were elections (which they eventually lost).
How can we take you seriously when you affirm that Noriega was a candidate in the 1990 elections in Nicaragua - when almost anyone who knows anything about Central America knows that he wasn't. (Hint: check out Panama instead...)
Basically, the 1990 election was a sham, as the U.S. made it know that they would withdraw all help to Nicaragua if the Sandinistas (who overthrew Somoza, a brutal dictator who had the support of the U.S.) were elected again. Nicaragua couldn't stand up to the U.S., its citizens knew that very well. That's why the Sandinistas lost in 1990.
Nice rewriting of history here...in other words, you're saying that it's okay to have a military coup if a government has unpopular policies...
Well, I'm sorry to break it to you, but there was only one acceptable way to get rid of Allende if you didn't agree with him: vote him out. Now if Allende had given himself dictatorial powers, like Pinochet did, then maybe you would have a point. The fact is, despite what you think of Allende's politics (which were a lot more popular with the majority of Chileans than with the rich landowners, I'll give you that), Chile was still a democracy, because there were still going to be elections.
But you've touched on the inherent risk of democracy, that it contains the seed of its own destruction: the people can put an anti-democratic party in power if they vote so. Even in the States, with sufficient votes, it would theoretically be possible to amend the constitution in very undemocratic ways - though I doubt this would ever happen, thanks to the numerous checks and balances of the american system).
In other words, despite Dubya's warning, Iraqis could very well vote en masse for an Islamic party. That is their right. What you have to do in democratic societies is to educate the masses enough so that they don't vote for fascist/non-democratic/extremist parties. To oppose restrictions on what people can vote for is contrary to the democratic ideal, even though it does carry the risk of less democracy.
Three words: Codeweaver's Crossover Office. Rejoice.
You should know that KDE 3.1 is less bloated than 2.x - it runs faster, too. Don't know about Gnome 2.x, but I've heard similar claims. On the other hand, try to run XP on that P100... :-)
Yeah, I agree that can be a problem. Let's just say it can make for long resumes in just a few years! ;-)
Are you an idiot? Look at what the US government has done to farming and ranching? Oftentimes farmers are paid to _not_ grow anything. Government in business never works long term...
;-) Seriously, I'd be curious to read more on this - real serious studies, not anything from a conservative think-thank (yeah, they're impartial towards government intervention...honest!). I'd be curious to see why the U.S. efforts haven't worked, while ours have. Do you suggest any particular, low-bias reading on the matter?
Ah, warm breeze of anonymous flames...First, who said anything about long-term? Most govt. involvement in the economy is anything but - if only because governments will sometimes cancel programs just because they were started by the previous one (if it was from the opposing party, of course). Not to mention when businessmen hold political office - Dick Cheney and Halliburton come to mind. One of the few semi-permanent govt. (and therefore, tax-funded) fixture in the american economy is the Pentagon, which has been the private sector's friend for decades. I haven't really heard about the farmers - I'd like a link, if you have one. I always like to read about bureaucratic fuck-ups. Make no mistake, though: private bureaucracies make dumb mistakes as well!
A better example is Canada's health care system. Everyone is covered, thanks to government mandate, but everyone gets the same mediocre service.
I beg to differ, having used the Canadian health care sytem on many occasions. The service is very adequate. It might not be stellar, but it sure ain't mediocre! Montreal hospitals are a bit too crowded sometimes (which is mostly due to an aging population), but there are other free services such as CLSCs (similar to community clinics). One thing is for sure: even though they sometimes gripe about it, Canadians are deeply attached to their healthcare system, and the great majority wouldn't trade it in for an american-style one - especially if they've lived in the states for a while. That should tell you something about its value! You know, free as in beer feels a small price to pay for waiting an hour more when your life isn't in danger. So is knowing that poor folks having trouble making ends meet can still get adequate care if they or their children get sick or injured. I guess that's called good old human compassion. (Which reminds me, that's a sentence we don't hear as much these days: compassionate conservatism...I wonder why?)
Even in the states, where there is at least incentive to innovate in healthcare, the government has meddled and driven up costs for everyone.
Hey, it's not because you guys didn't get it right that it means it can't work!
Er...I guess you were replying to the other poster, since we seem to agree on all points! ;-) Are you in the industry as well?
I disagree. In Quebec the government gave incentive for multimedia companies (and, to a lesser extent, game developers - there still needs to be some education about the distinction between the two among government officials), paying part of new employee's salaries for the first year, then a smaller part for the next five years or so. It grealy helped to spur the economy (even though the dot-com burst still affected us in the end). However, the only extent to which the government "poked their nose" was to verify that the money indeed went to new employees as salaries, and not to line the pockets of owners. I'm always puzzled by the visceral opposition people in the States have towards government intervention in business - especially considering that, without government subsidies, there would never have been a computer industry. The fact is that the three industries who've enjoyed the biggest growth (hi-tech, pharmaceutical and agriculture) are also the ones that have most benefited from government intervention (loans, tax breaks and subsidies). Also, when you consider the amount of money injected in the private sector through the Pentagon (i.e. your tax dollars at work), it's hard not to conclude that the U.S. has very interventionist economical policies. I know right-wing libertarians are going to flame me for this, but the fact is that a totally free market is an abomination that all industrialized countries abandoned since 1929 in favor of mixed economies (to varying degrees). With that in mind, I think government helping out small, independent studios (be it for games, films, art, books, etc.) is a great idea, as most of these won't be able to survive their first game, which will end up being the property of the publisher instead. Anyway, my subsidized 0.02$
...if I remember correctly, it was called a ZX81... :-)
I think you should read that GPL again. It does not give someone the right to distribute the code (or parts of the code) in binary form, but then requires whomever distributes it to also offer the sources as well - and give credit to the original authors. They are also prohibited from not extending these same distribution rights and obligations to who get their software. So that company can use parts from the kernel, but they have to give out the sources of their software and give credit where it's due - as well as the permission to redistribute the software under the GPL. If I understand correctly, they have failed to do this.
In other words, yes, you were wrong, and have now been corrected. GPL does not mean Public Domain (even though the two share some similarities). It seems you're going to keep waiting a looong time for whatever gripe you have with the GPL to materialize.
According to the article that's 50 million yen for Tokyo alone...for the whole of Japan it's closer a billion yen (8.3 million$).
In either case it's not that big of a sum, but any amount helps!
Correction: no easy way to change resolution and color depth on-the-fly. You can easily change resolution/color depth through the distro's control panel (i.e. the Mandrake Control Panel). You just need to log off and restart X to activate the changes.
Anyway, as I said in another post, Windows and Linux/XFree86/KDE have followed different evolutions, so on-the-fly screen resolution and depth change is something that is indeed lacking from the latter (actually, the RandR extension is present in the latest versions of XFree86 - you can do it from the command line, but there's no GUI tool for it). My point, which you conveniently ignore, was that the KDE desktop, on the other hand, can do all these other things that Windows can't do by default. So, when version 3.2 comes along with the RandR control panel, the Windows Desktop won't have anything on the KDE Desktop (I won't speak for Gnome, since I'm not that familiar with the new version). You know what? I don't mind waiting a couple of months for a function I never use anyway...