Just for reference, I think a screenshot of this entire thread is a great example of why people lash out against Linux users. The arrogance and piss poor attitude (and completely missing the point) are great examples of ways to hinder Linux adoption as a whole. It's like reading Dirk Hohndel's thread on G+ about the Desktop Summit and how people were attacked and bashed, face to face, for criticizing GNOME3.
it's contempt for TRYING TO MAKE USERS STUPID
Which has little to nothing to do with creating a graphical subsystem that works around the flaws in Xorg. All I see people screaming about in this thread is rendering windows over the network, and not a single bit of discussion regarding the security questions, changes to DRM and DRI in the kernel, or the video of the talk by the lead of Xorg.
This has nothing to do with the idiocy behind GNOME3, Unity, or KDE4. This is about Wayland, an Xorg replacement.
Then do the IT thing and manage your old server with your old applications. Stop insisting that the rest of the Linux world be held back so as to service your concerns. It's not like they're going to outright eliminate your ability to use Xorg, or ban Xservers running on Wayland (which already exist, iirc.)
I've noticed a lot of comments like yours, crying about how Linux is being "dumbed down" for the sake of "stupid people."
I am at a loss as to where this contempt for other users, who might want decent graphics for their desktop and mobile systems, comes from. Can you tell me? Why such resistance to change is channeled into hatred for others, instead of into valid arguments that might result in seeing your concerns addressed?
even the science shows are no longer willing to consider all sides of an argument
There aren't always two sides to everything. Can you give an example of this bias in science shows?
Fox also isn't that bad in the sense that they actually are open about their biases
Fox News? Nonsense. They are horribly biased but say "we're unbiased" with a straight face. CNN is wishy-washy and gives too much credence to broken, invalid standpoints. It sounds more like you've lost perspective on what "unbiased" is.
I suspect many people would be whining about Edward R. Murrow these days. Would he be "liberal" and "biased" to you?
The G Tablet runs the same android as most other tablets. It's problem is the shitty screen that makes it unusable, and it came out running Android 2.2, so you had to root and install the market before it was usable.
Besides, the 'nice' thing about SSNs is... If you know where the person was born, and what year (not hard to find), you can predict 6 out of the 10 digits with a high degree of accuracy, thus aiding substantially in the cryptanalysis.
That's assuming that South Korean SSNs are issued using similar procedures as US SSNs.
Github, gitorious (we run an internal gitorious server.)
I think the fact that its primary use case is the Linux kernel has been a huge selling point in terms of its ability to quickly and reliably handle huge development communities and codebases. That it basically came to be in the very pragmatic environment of the entire Linux community also helped, as it is being used for both open and closed source projects.
All the other tools are too niche, proprietary, or were eclipsed by Git's exposure.
What do you think these patent lawsuits are if not competing on innovation?
It's a war game designed to stake out territory and drive the barriers to entry up. The goal is to destroy competition, first and foremost.
patents are a way of staking claim to your innovations and preventing others from taking advantage of it in hopes that the resulting product will be better than the competition's
That is absolutely not what's going on here. This is about filing and buying as many patents as possible to ensure that your competitors are beset by legal challenges in the hopes that they go away or go under.
Apple is not your run of the mill patent troll. They actually make products incorporating these patentable inventions and I can't fault them for wanting to prevent other competing products from using those inventions.
Sure, but if Apple has its way, we'll only have products on the market from companies that Apple permits, and in that case we all lose.
We all remember that Nokia managed to get a licensing out of Apple, so why shouldn't Apple be able to do the same for things they invented?
What has Apple invented that isn't software that they are suing over?
It will bring definite disadvantage to any possible new competitors, since Apple et. al. will be able to handily keep them out of the market. In the mobile space, there will only be the incumbents. No new companies will rise, and this "Patent Axis" will make sure of that.
They even have the legal power to arrest people for getting your app in other ways, though they have yet to do this.
Not yet. They wanted desperately the ability to slap down anyone distributing a jailbreak, but the Library of Congress exempted jailbreaking, temporarily at least.
So you're close, they want that power. They don't have it, yet.
That would simply give Apple's iBooks a 30% advantage. This is just Apple fucking with people they see as competitors, and abusing their lock on the iProduct userbase to do so.
of course when you say 'not optional' you mean 'because they need it!' Need is not coercion.
I need electricity. I do have to agree to a contract, in exchange for service. By your own logic, they are free to stick whatever terms in there they want and I am bound to them. Otherwise I can fight them in court (and they can just outspend me) or just "do without" because I don't need electricity.
If you want something from somebody, you play by their rules
I see. So all power to the provider, none to the consumer. No negotiation, no fairness. Which is pretty much how we operate these days.
Money is speech, that is more than just a principle, it is a precedent established by more than one Supreme Court decision
Well, I think this clearly outlines your thought process. Perhaps you would be happy if we gave up any illusion of being a Republic "for the people, of the people, and by the people," since it seems that would suit you much better.
Businesses should be as free to have political say as any other person
Businesses are not people. They are absolutely not citizens. But you already don't care about that.
Got it. The desire to not be abused by large corporations or via contracts (acceptance of which is not always optional) is now an "entitlement mindset." I suppose it's an "entitlement mindset" to not want our elections to be unduly influenced by corporate money.
Slashdot Mirror
Even when it solves security, rendering, and configuration problems? That's bad?
This isn't "new for new's sake," but I have yet to see any real arguments other than "omg network transparency!"
Just for reference, I think a screenshot of this entire thread is a great example of why people lash out against Linux users. The arrogance and piss poor attitude (and completely missing the point) are great examples of ways to hinder Linux adoption as a whole. It's like reading Dirk Hohndel's thread on G+ about the Desktop Summit and how people were attacked and bashed, face to face, for criticizing GNOME3.
Which has little to nothing to do with creating a graphical subsystem that works around the flaws in Xorg. All I see people screaming about in this thread is rendering windows over the network, and not a single bit of discussion regarding the security questions, changes to DRM and DRI in the kernel, or the video of the talk by the lead of Xorg.
This has nothing to do with the idiocy behind GNOME3, Unity, or KDE4. This is about Wayland, an Xorg replacement.
Then do the IT thing and manage your old server with your old applications. Stop insisting that the rest of the Linux world be held back so as to service your concerns. It's not like they're going to outright eliminate your ability to use Xorg, or ban Xservers running on Wayland (which already exist, iirc.)
Unfortunately, both the 50" TV and 27" screen are 1920x1080, both of which only have a hair more resolution than my 20.1" desktop monitor.
I've noticed a lot of comments like yours, crying about how Linux is being "dumbed down" for the sake of "stupid people."
I am at a loss as to where this contempt for other users, who might want decent graphics for their desktop and mobile systems, comes from. Can you tell me? Why such resistance to change is channeled into hatred for others, instead of into valid arguments that might result in seeing your concerns addressed?
There aren't always two sides to everything. Can you give an example of this bias in science shows?
Fox News? Nonsense. They are horribly biased but say "we're unbiased" with a straight face. CNN is wishy-washy and gives too much credence to broken, invalid standpoints. It sounds more like you've lost perspective on what "unbiased" is.
I suspect many people would be whining about Edward R. Murrow these days. Would he be "liberal" and "biased" to you?
No, please stop assuming things.
MeeGo is built against the LSB, and is not Fedora derived, nor is it Debian derived.
Harmattan, which the N9 runs, is based on Maemo and offers a lot of MeeGo APIs. Harmattan is Debian derived.
Maemo isn't designed for it so much as that's how it happened due to the flash layout on the N900.
Also MeeGo is actually Debian-based with RPM package management shoehorned in. Weird, I know.
No, it isn't. MeeGo is purely RPM based. The N9 runs Harmattan, which is effectively Maemo 6 and still a DEB based system.
So long as said security doesn't inhibit my ability to use my machine entirely as I wish, and doesn't treat me as an enemy as well.
The G Tablet runs the same android as most other tablets. It's problem is the shitty screen that makes it unusable, and it came out running Android 2.2, so you had to root and install the market before it was usable.
That's assuming that South Korean SSNs are issued using similar procedures as US SSNs.
Github, gitorious (we run an internal gitorious server.)
I think the fact that its primary use case is the Linux kernel has been a huge selling point in terms of its ability to quickly and reliably handle huge development communities and codebases. That it basically came to be in the very pragmatic environment of the entire Linux community also helped, as it is being used for both open and closed source projects.
All the other tools are too niche, proprietary, or were eclipsed by Git's exposure.
It's a war game designed to stake out territory and drive the barriers to entry up. The goal is to destroy competition, first and foremost.
That is absolutely not what's going on here. This is about filing and buying as many patents as possible to ensure that your competitors are beset by legal challenges in the hopes that they go away or go under.
Sure, but if Apple has its way, we'll only have products on the market from companies that Apple permits, and in that case we all lose.
What has Apple invented that isn't software that they are suing over?
It will bring definite disadvantage to any possible new competitors, since Apple et. al. will be able to handily keep them out of the market. In the mobile space, there will only be the incumbents. No new companies will rise, and this "Patent Axis" will make sure of that.
Ah the lock-in "ecosystem." Isn't it wonderful?
Not yet. They wanted desperately the ability to slap down anyone distributing a jailbreak, but the Library of Congress exempted jailbreaking, temporarily at least.
So you're close, they want that power. They don't have it, yet.
That would simply give Apple's iBooks a 30% advantage. This is just Apple fucking with people they see as competitors, and abusing their lock on the iProduct userbase to do so.
I need electricity. I do have to agree to a contract, in exchange for service. By your own logic, they are free to stick whatever terms in there they want and I am bound to them. Otherwise I can fight them in court (and they can just outspend me) or just "do without" because I don't need electricity.
I see. So all power to the provider, none to the consumer. No negotiation, no fairness. Which is pretty much how we operate these days.
Well, I think this clearly outlines your thought process. Perhaps you would be happy if we gave up any illusion of being a Republic "for the people, of the people, and by the people," since it seems that would suit you much better.
Businesses are not people. They are absolutely not citizens. But you already don't care about that.
Got it. The desire to not be abused by large corporations or via contracts (acceptance of which is not always optional) is now an "entitlement mindset." I suppose it's an "entitlement mindset" to not want our elections to be unduly influenced by corporate money.
You're a clever troll. I almost gave you a real response.
So NFC will somehow break if I encrypt data and transmit THAT?
How does AES-128 break NFC?
Surely NFC systems will be available that can be set to prompt for transactions over a given amount.
Of course, current transaction systems could lie to you just as well today.
I imagine that Apple is relying on their pull to cripple NFC, rather than lack of NFC crippling Apple.
But nonetheless all of those methods require point to point pairing. NFC has no concept of pairing, you wave it past a sensor and something happens.
Having to stop and pair your device with a coke machine is a large amount of effort for such a tiny transaction.
I expect the information being sent over NFC to be encrypted. There's nothing that requires data transmitted via NFC be unencrypted.
Unless you want to try and pair with every wireless payment device you come across?