Violated the 4th Amendment (oh right, we're not qualified to understand our own rights.)
Do you REALLY think the US intelligence community -- who employ the smartest people in a nation of 320 million people -- be stupid enough to invest billions of dollars setting up a surveillance operation if it could be trivially be proven to be illegal?
No, they'd do it and rely on secrecy, security clearances, high pay, intimidation and threats of legal retribution if it gets out and they find out who did it.
Occam's Razor applies here.
A government with a track record of violating the constitution and human rights of many people has, yet again, violated the constitution?
The simplest explanation applies here -- what the government has done is perfectly legal
This does not follow. The government has many a time done illegal, underhanded things and tried to cover it up. I bet you'd do your damnedest to suggest that no one's rights have been violated by the Drug War, too.
You're not naive enough to think they'll overrule this, are you?
I don't think we can say which way they'd vote at this point. Well except for Scalia, who is easily spooked if someone says "omg terrorists!" and starts wetting himself (and voting in favor of whatever argument violates our rights while claiming to offer "security.")
I see you're wholly on the NSA's side in this matter.
if you want to match wits with veteran lawyers in court, with no training or special expertise in something involving your freedom and livelihood, you've got WAAAY bigger balls than me.
Of course I wouldn't, it's his court and he's got a bloated, overblown rulebook full of over-interpretations of the constitution along with all the case law to go with it. Doesn't make him right and me wrong. If anything, it means that ignorance of the law is an excuse because I can't possibly know (or afford) to understand it.
you'd think interpreting the Constitution would be the easiest thing in the world
It was written such that it would be. That lawyers have deliberately muddled things doesn't change it.
It's the Dunning Kruger Effect writ large.
Note to all: attempting to understand your rights and the law without a law degree means you are incapable of recognizing your own incompetence. But this, of course, doesn't apply to benjfowler who is apparently right in all things.
I like the idea that our rights and laws can only be understood by specialized lawyers, but they're supposed to apply to us and ignorance is not a defense.
It's a completely irrational state of affairs, and the best part is when people criticize others using it.
The thing about "net neutrality" is they don't actually have to do anything. Hell we could get 99% of what is needed for true network neutrality by declaring ISPs to be common carriers.
And PCIe 1.0 is well and truly obsolete. PCIe 3.0 is shipping already and we have devices targeted at workstations maxing out PCIe 2.0 x8 links handily. Never mind the latency increases imposed by Thunderbolt.
TB has its place, but as the exclusive means of expansion in a system it is lacking.
I'm mocking him. He sees a tiny bit of uncertainty in the guys comments and reads it as if the guy is completely blowing off remote access when it's obvious that he's not.
I read that everything he said was qualified with the word PROBABLY.
Ah, yes because he said "we could probably do better" it's instantly terrible and doomed.
What did you read?
I read it as someone who was confident of their solution but unsure of the final form, believed that their prototype implementation was already better than X11/VNC, and acknowledged that there was room for improvement but wasn't sure how much. You read it as "we don't care" and I'll wager that if anyone here is off base, it's you.
I see you were never interested in having an honest discussion. Rather, you were waiting for a response of any kind so you could lash out angrily and move goal posts.
I dont have a raspberry pi
Which is in no way relevant.
not some niche little fad product with 512mb of RAM that has a month waiting list so hipsterss can pretend they are saving money
So beyond being a raging asshole, you ignore the fact that the Pi runs Debian, same as the desktop, and has a Weston build targeted that works right now.
if a program cannot build easily on a standard linux machine, its not going to be adopted by hundred of millions of people and its not going to topple an installed standard with a huge userbase
What are you blubbering about? The GP admitted he had a hard time installing Apache, so suggesting that if he can't install it from source then Wayland is doomed is just you being ridiculous.
Ranting and raving from ignorance is no way to act. Hell, the vast majority of people will get these via pre-compiled and integrated RPM/DEB packages.
Sounds like you aren't interested in hearing the arguments, but I'll try.
No, I'm just tired of bad arguments.
Practically all X11 apps can run remotely - the ones that can't are likely to be inherently limited, like video players or 3d first person shooters that have bandwidth and latency requirements that are transport constrained. Outside of those types and pathological configurations, remote X11 just works for all apps.
That's nice. But it's a very limited subset of how computers are used, and there's nothing in Wayland that makes it impossible to do this.
"We haven't given it serious thought" is a particularly bad approach to convince people to quit bitching.
Maybe because they know you won't even when they make an entirely point and put it in front of you? Read what he said:
Wayland remoting will probably look a like a higher-performance version of VNC, a prototype already exists. And this is without us even giving it serious thought about how to make it better. We could probably do better if we tried.
When he said "without us giving it a serious thought about how to make it better" he said that, out of the gate, it was better than X11 remoting and better than VNC remoting without them even seriously trying and that if they had, it would be even better.
It's not "we don't care," it's that "we've got it handled better than X, easily."
I tried to install it months ago using the huge pile of instructions at freedesktop.org. It didn't work.
Given that the "huge pile of instructions" are build instructions, unless you're familiar with building from source it's probably best avoided.
I have to run export somethingorother_path=/tmp/ && weston to run it every time.
Probably LD_LOAD_PATH, because their setup is installing to the user's home directory and not the system, to keep things clean. It's entirely testing centric at this point.
Do I really have to install X11-under-Weston using their other huge page of instructions to do anything interesting?
If everything "interesting" you're doing currently uses X11 libraries, yes.
I barely got Apache installed properly.
No offense, but if this is true then I doubt you really need to worry about (or comment on the difficulty of setting up) Weston just yet.
I wish the Raspberry Pi Foundation would just release a Weston Testng Fun Times Image I could flash.
How, then, could an end user choose which toolkit he/she is using, as you suggest?
Sorry, I phrased that from a developer's perspective. Few developers really have any need to worry about pixels in their UI, and shouldn't be for this very reason.
Assuming the situation that Ungrounded Lightning described.
Well if it's an arbitrary, raster-based toolkit then I assume it'll be scaled by some system default, just like they're scaled on OS X. It's a transitional period where we're going to be breaking things for a bit as we identify all the things that don't handle high dpi screens well.
I've seen what happens when you run X11 apps on windows. All the fancy widget themes and whatnot break. If that's not it, then I invite you to enlighten me.
you try to claim there is nothing wrong with that
I love the blind implication that the exact same whatever will happen with Wayland and, therefore, we should oppose Wayland.
you really have no clue why people are resisting Wayland.
The only argument I've seen is the lack of network transparency, often poorly worded with no actual technical argument behind it.
Android is succeeding at end-user adoption where X11 has failed miserably for your "20 years", so you should be looking at Android for guidance, not dismissing it as a blip.
The only lesson to be learned here is that if you've got Google driving you, you're probably going to succeed. Suggesting that there is anything to be learned here about X11 vs. SurfaceFlinger is ridiculous.
The truth is that X11 is utterly, completely unsuitable for anything a non-technical end user ever sees.
Which is entirely untrue. By that logic my N9 is completely unsuitable for use by anyone "non-technical" because it uses Xorg, but most people would be completely unable to tell.
So if I have monitors with high resolution I still have to tell all the applications to change their size, individually, or use a microscope to read the text, right?
You're using a modern toolkit, one that scales depending on the DPI reported by the display server, right? Wayland is entirely correct to be aware of pixels, it's your toolkit that should provide and operate with geometry which it translates into a rendered output that is placed into the buffer that Wayland manages.
If I stretch a window (intending to scale it, rather than just see more of what it shows) it has to go back to the application for re-rendering, right?
If the toolkit is any good, the application won't be aware of it.
And if I have adjacent monitors with different resolutions they won't match up. Heaven help me if I lay a window across the boundary between two, the T between 3, or the + between four. Right?
A bit of reading would suggest that scaling would be employed on a per-monitor basis, I don't have time to read in depth to figure out what the logic is behind it.
Well he gave an answer in the article: if you move to "fix X", you end up making X12. And when you do that, all the stakeholders in X come out of the woodwork and insist on preserving all the legacy parts of the system that, frankly, don't belong.
The way things have unfolded, X11 will become a library on top of Wayland. And that's perfectly fine.
Slashdot Mirror
Violated the 4th Amendment (oh right, we're not qualified to understand our own rights.)
No, they'd do it and rely on secrecy, security clearances, high pay, intimidation and threats of legal retribution if it gets out and they find out who did it.
A government with a track record of violating the constitution and human rights of many people has, yet again, violated the constitution?
This does not follow. The government has many a time done illegal, underhanded things and tried to cover it up. I bet you'd do your damnedest to suggest that no one's rights have been violated by the Drug War, too.
I don't think we can say which way they'd vote at this point. Well except for Scalia, who is easily spooked if someone says "omg terrorists!" and starts wetting himself (and voting in favor of whatever argument violates our rights while claiming to offer "security.")
I see you're wholly on the NSA's side in this matter.
Of course I wouldn't, it's his court and he's got a bloated, overblown rulebook full of over-interpretations of the constitution along with all the case law to go with it. Doesn't make him right and me wrong. If anything, it means that ignorance of the law is an excuse because I can't possibly know (or afford) to understand it.
It was written such that it would be. That lawyers have deliberately muddled things doesn't change it.
Note to all: attempting to understand your rights and the law without a law degree means you are incapable of recognizing your own incompetence. But this, of course, doesn't apply to benjfowler who is apparently right in all things.
How about you explain what's wrong with it?
I like the idea that our rights and laws can only be understood by specialized lawyers, but they're supposed to apply to us and ignorance is not a defense.
It's a completely irrational state of affairs, and the best part is when people criticize others using it.
The thing about "net neutrality" is they don't actually have to do anything. Hell we could get 99% of what is needed for true network neutrality by declaring ISPs to be common carriers.
And PCIe 1.0 is well and truly obsolete. PCIe 3.0 is shipping already and we have devices targeted at workstations maxing out PCIe 2.0 x8 links handily. Never mind the latency increases imposed by Thunderbolt.
TB has its place, but as the exclusive means of expansion in a system it is lacking.
A masterful troll.
No, it's why Linux has made so much progress. It has nothing to do with why "businesses choose Microsoft."
What, I can't be sarcastic?
Looks like he hasn't touched his other projects either.
And RDP supports rootless forwarding just like X11. But that's just one possible way of forwarding them. It's not like its impossibe.
Nothing is stopping you from continuing to stick to Xorg, of course. Wayland won't fully displace X11 for a while.
I'm mocking him. He sees a tiny bit of uncertainty in the guys comments and reads it as if the guy is completely blowing off remote access when it's obvious that he's not.
Ah, yes because he said "we could probably do better" it's instantly terrible and doomed.
I read it as someone who was confident of their solution but unsure of the final form, believed that their prototype implementation was already better than X11/VNC, and acknowledged that there was room for improvement but wasn't sure how much. You read it as "we don't care" and I'll wager that if anyone here is off base, it's you.
Why are you asking me these questions? Did you forget to take your meds?
The only "asshole" here is you. Just look at your mad ranting.
I see you were never interested in having an honest discussion. Rather, you were waiting for a response of any kind so you could lash out angrily and move goal posts.
Which is in no way relevant.
So beyond being a raging asshole, you ignore the fact that the Pi runs Debian, same as the desktop, and has a Weston build targeted that works right now.
What are you blubbering about? The GP admitted he had a hard time installing Apache, so suggesting that if he can't install it from source then Wayland is doomed is just you being ridiculous.
Ranting and raving from ignorance is no way to act. Hell, the vast majority of people will get these via pre-compiled and integrated RPM/DEB packages.
Augh, bad engrish today.
should read
No, I'm just tired of bad arguments.
That's nice. But it's a very limited subset of how computers are used, and there's nothing in Wayland that makes it impossible to do this.
Maybe because they know you won't even when they make an entirely point and put it in front of you? Read what he said:
When he said "without us giving it a serious thought about how to make it better" he said that, out of the gate, it was better than X11 remoting and better than VNC remoting without them even seriously trying and that if they had, it would be even better.
It's not "we don't care," it's that "we've got it handled better than X, easily."
Given that the "huge pile of instructions" are build instructions, unless you're familiar with building from source it's probably best avoided.
Probably LD_LOAD_PATH, because their setup is installing to the user's home directory and not the system, to keep things clean. It's entirely testing centric at this point.
If everything "interesting" you're doing currently uses X11 libraries, yes.
No offense, but if this is true then I doubt you really need to worry about (or comment on the difficulty of setting up) Weston just yet.
Which is wholly off topic for them.
Sorry, I phrased that from a developer's perspective. Few developers really have any need to worry about pixels in their UI, and shouldn't be for this very reason.
Well if it's an arbitrary, raster-based toolkit then I assume it'll be scaled by some system default, just like they're scaled on OS X. It's a transitional period where we're going to be breaking things for a bit as we identify all the things that don't handle high dpi screens well.
I see we're whipping out the baseless attacks now!
I've seen what happens when you run X11 apps on windows. All the fancy widget themes and whatnot break. If that's not it, then I invite you to enlighten me.
I love the blind implication that the exact same whatever will happen with Wayland and, therefore, we should oppose Wayland.
The only argument I've seen is the lack of network transparency, often poorly worded with no actual technical argument behind it.
The only lesson to be learned here is that if you've got Google driving you, you're probably going to succeed. Suggesting that there is anything to be learned here about X11 vs. SurfaceFlinger is ridiculous.
Which is entirely untrue. By that logic my N9 is completely unsuitable for use by anyone "non-technical" because it uses Xorg, but most people would be completely unable to tell.
You're using a modern toolkit, one that scales depending on the DPI reported by the display server, right? Wayland is entirely correct to be aware of pixels, it's your toolkit that should provide and operate with geometry which it translates into a rendered output that is placed into the buffer that Wayland manages.
If the toolkit is any good, the application won't be aware of it.
A bit of reading would suggest that scaling would be employed on a per-monitor basis, I don't have time to read in depth to figure out what the logic is behind it.
Well he gave an answer in the article: if you move to "fix X", you end up making X12. And when you do that, all the stakeholders in X come out of the woodwork and insist on preserving all the legacy parts of the system that, frankly, don't belong.
The way things have unfolded, X11 will become a library on top of Wayland. And that's perfectly fine.