I've got a "cybil", too... Cyrix machine... at the time I named her, she multi-booted Linux, OS/2, Win95, and DOS. Down to just Linux now, but the name stuck...
My other machines: lynn: My first Linux box. xena and gabrielle: an XT and the Linux box that routes ARCnet for it. deliah: A Dell. arienrhod: Built out of parts that came out of cybil (that really should be the other way around). amanda, tessa, and anne: The Macs.
There's also anastasia, cassandra, cloe, and eddi, who haven't got humor buried in their names...
Oh, and I named my workstation at work grover. The box is from Big Blue, and I work for a PBS station... (We've also got an oscar, and we had an elmo for a while.)
Arena? Arena?? As software that doesn't suck? LMAO!
Sorry. I've used Arena. I haven't seen a page yet that it renders correctly... it manages to screw up even the most basic HTML. lynx produces better formatted and more correct page renderings than Arena does. I think lynx may even handle tables better than Arena...
Amaya, now, is a different story. Still not as good as Netscape, but close. If it didn't try to edit every page you brought up in it, it might even be better than Netscape... it's certainly more stable.
Mozilla requires glibc2. It will run on Slackware 4.0, if you selected the glibc2 compatibility library at install time (if you didn't, you should be able to add it easily enough with pkgtool). You'll probably need to compile Mozilla yourself... I haven't been able to get any of the binary tarballs to run on Slack. Something about a missing symbol... After a recompile, viewer works fine. As of M9, I'm still having trouble with apprunner dying silently when it tries to open its first window, though. Maybe M10 fixes that. We'll see...
Relative to Netscape 4.x, yes, IE 5 is fast, stable, and standards-compliant. On any kind of absolute scale it is not, however. And we're not talking about Netscape 4.x, here, we're talking about Mozilla.
Mozilla, even at this point, utterly humiliates IE on standards-compliance.
Mozilla's performance, speed-wise, is very erratic, but, in many cases, it's faster than anything but lynx. I think most of its slow-downs are from debug code (in the interface, especially, where the buttons babble on stderr constantly), and from the fact that its cache isn't yet fully implemented. Every now and then it'll hit something it can do without talking to you about it, and it'll be blazing fast for a moment...
IE's got it on stability. Hell, even Netscape 4.0 has it on stability. But Mozilla is still pre-beta. What do you want... perfection from a product that hasn't been released yet?
Keep in mind that no one actually uses all of the code found in the kernel source. That 50+ meg of source builds a 600k kernel, once all the drivers and support for other platforms that you don't need are weeded out of it. Because it never actually gets built, it's not bloat... it's flexibility.
If you don't like something, don't put it in. If you do, well, it's there for you.
We've got the source. It doesn't matter what AOL and Netscape do. As long as there's someone in the world who wants a fast, stable, standards-compliant web browser, Mozilla isn't dead. And, no, IE does not meet any of those requirements.
Probably not the majority, but...
on
Nitrozac Answers
·
· Score: 1
The percentage of both female and male gay/lez/bi is certainly higher than in "mainstream" culture. Or at least the percentage of people who are out is higher. A more tolerant culture and the greater degree of physical safety afforded by distance and anonymity probably helps.
Unless, of course, your site *does* contain hard-core, incest, bestiality, and vulgar language, in which case you rate it as "cute and fuzzy bunnies, appropriate for all ages". They can't prosecute all of us.
The one problem that I see with this is that they may not have to. Note that this is a "self-policing" system... or, more accurately, a system policed by the next layer up. So your ISP is required to police you, and, presumably, their ISP is required to police them, and so on up the chain until you get to the big backbone networks that don't have providers, just peers. These are few enough that the government can effectively put pressure on them, and in turn make them put pressure on their clients, and so on back down the chain, until your ISP tells you to rate your stuff correctly, or you'll get booted, because they'd rather lose you than lose their whole business, because their ISP has just told them the same thing...
The guys who own the wire have the real power here, so they're the ones that need to be brought into line for the government to enforce this. Unfortunately, it may just be practical for them to do so. You think Sprint is going to go head-to-head with the Feds over what J. Random Webmaster puts on his home page?
Dunno about that capitalizing "paganism". Unlike Christianity or Judaism, it's not a specific form of religion. Certainly, Druidism, Wicca, Discordianism, and so on should be capitalized, but paganism isn't a religion, it's a term that describes a set of religions. Capitalizing it would be kind of like capitalizing "monotheism".
John Campbell, Agnostic Discordian Coaxial Cabal Sorta kinda pagan for a while now.
Heehee... we played with thermite in Chemistry class in high school (my Chemistry teacher may not have been entirely sane). We mixed up about a quarter inch of the stuff in the bottom of a tuna can and set it off in one of the parking lots in the pouring rain. It was pretty impressive... when the magnesium burned down and the thermite went up, I could feel the wave of heat hit from fifteen feet away. Then the parking lot caught on fire and smoldered for quite a while despite the rain. What was left when it was all over was a misshapen lump of iron and ruby (yeah, that's what aluminum oxide is... if hot enough to melt iron isn't impressive, how about hot enough to melt ruby?).
Merced won't be an x86... Disclaimer: This is not an attempt to express an opinion either way on whether Microsoft could, would, or should create their own Linux distro.
Re:SCO's attitude towards Linux is nothing new
on
SCO Talks About Linux
·
· Score: 3
I don't think it's a matter of strength so much as simply that SCO is the company that's standing most directly in front of the Linux steamroller. The other commercial Unix vendors are primarily hardware vendors. Sun and SGI aren't threatened by Linux, because they're not out to sell operating systems. They're out to sell the hardware. It doesn't matter much to them whether you run {Solaris,Irix} or Linux on it after you buy it. In some ways, Linux is advantageous to them... it frees them from having to devote the programmer-hours to develop and maintain the OS - that task gets done for them for free by the Linux community. SCO, on the other hand, is a software vendor. They sell an OS to run on readily available third-party hardware. Since SCO isn't making anything off the sale of the hardware, if Linux supplants SCO on that hardware, SCO is screwed... they no longer have a source of income. Companies without income don't last long. Even Microsoft has less cause to worry about Linux than SCO does. Though they're also a software vendor, Windows fills a different niche than Linux currently does, and so is less immediately threatened by Linux's growth. SCO, on the other hand, is an x86 Unix, just like Linux, so they're in direct competition for the same market. And Linux has the advantages of being free, open, and (arguably) simply better.
Intel is killing the x86 line anyway. We already knew that. If you want to pull the usual Mac zealot trick of comparing products that don't exist yet, try comparing future G4s to future IA64 chips, not to current Pentiums...
And if you know enough about Merced to make this comparison, I'd honestly like to hear it.
No, a 486 can't compare to a modern chip. That's exactly my point. You can't compare the processing power of two chips by comparing what kind of heat-dissipation equipment is attached to them. If the hypothesis that the G4 is faster because it has just a heat sink while the P-III needs a heat sink and fan is true, then it follows that this here 486-66 could whip both their tails, because it doesn't even need a heat sink. And my 8088, as you point out, is even better, because it not only doesn't have a heat sink, it's barely warm to the touch. Oh, and those big liquid-cooled supercomputers? Those things must just suck...
Slashdot Mirror
Here's a few good ones (I'll leave out the obvious links to Sluggy and stuff, and those that I've seen people mention already.):
Nukees
Acid Reflux
Snail Dust
Avalon
Bruno
Waiting For Bob (currently on hiatus)
Clan of the Cats
It's Walky
Irritability
I've got a "cybil", too... Cyrix machine... at the time I named her, she multi-booted Linux, OS/2, Win95, and DOS. Down to just Linux now, but the name stuck...
My other machines:
lynn: My first Linux box.
xena and gabrielle: an XT and the Linux box that routes ARCnet for it.
deliah: A Dell.
arienrhod: Built out of parts that came out of cybil (that really should be the other way around).
amanda, tessa, and anne: The Macs.
There's also anastasia, cassandra, cloe, and eddi, who haven't got humor buried in their names...
Oh, and I named my workstation at work grover. The box is from Big Blue, and I work for a PBS station... (We've also got an oscar, and we had an elmo for a while.)
Arena? Arena?? As software that doesn't suck? LMAO!
Sorry. I've used Arena. I haven't seen a page yet that it renders correctly... it manages to screw up even the most basic HTML. lynx produces better formatted and more correct page renderings than Arena does. I think lynx may even handle tables better than Arena...
Amaya, now, is a different story. Still not as good as Netscape, but close. If it didn't try to edit every page you brought up in it, it might even be better than Netscape... it's certainly more stable.
Mozilla requires glibc2. It will run on Slackware 4.0, if you selected the glibc2 compatibility library at install time (if you didn't, you should be able to add it easily enough with pkgtool). You'll probably need to compile Mozilla yourself... I haven't been able to get any of the binary tarballs to run on Slack. Something about a missing symbol... After a recompile, viewer works fine. As of M9, I'm still having trouble with apprunner dying silently when it tries to open its first window, though. Maybe M10 fixes that. We'll see...
-sigh-
Relative to Netscape 4.x , yes, IE 5 is fast, stable, and standards-compliant. On any kind of absolute scale it is not, however. And we're not talking about Netscape 4.x, here, we're talking about Mozilla.
Mozilla, even at this point, utterly humiliates IE on standards-compliance.
Mozilla's performance, speed-wise, is very erratic, but, in many cases, it's faster than anything but lynx. I think most of its slow-downs are from debug code (in the interface, especially, where the buttons babble on stderr constantly), and from the fact that its cache isn't yet fully implemented. Every now and then it'll hit something it can do without talking to you about it, and it'll be blazing fast for a moment...
IE's got it on stability. Hell, even Netscape 4.0 has it on stability. But Mozilla is still pre-beta. What do you want... perfection from a product that hasn't been released yet?
Keep in mind that no one actually uses all of the code found in the kernel source. That 50+ meg of source builds a 600k kernel, once all the drivers and support for other platforms that you don't need are weeded out of it. Because it never actually gets built, it's not bloat... it's flexibility.
If you don't like something, don't put it in. If you do, well, it's there for you.
We've got the source. It doesn't matter what AOL and Netscape do. As long as there's someone in the world who wants a fast, stable, standards-compliant web browser, Mozilla isn't dead. And, no, IE does not meet any of those requirements.
The percentage of both female and male gay/lez/bi is certainly higher than in "mainstream" culture. Or at least the percentage of people who are out is higher. A more tolerant culture and the greater degree of physical safety afforded by distance and anonymity probably helps.
So don't use Red Hat. Slackware has BSDish init scripts...
"Only wimps use tape backup: _real_ men just upload their important stuff on ftp, and let the rest of the world mirror it ;)"
-- Linus Torvalds
Unless, of course, your site *does* contain hard-core, incest, bestiality, and vulgar language, in which case you rate it as "cute and fuzzy bunnies, appropriate for all ages". They can't prosecute all of us.
The one problem that I see with this is that they may not have to. Note that this is a "self-policing" system... or, more accurately, a system policed by the next layer up. So your ISP is required to police you, and, presumably, their ISP is required to police them, and so on up the chain until you get to the big backbone networks that don't have providers, just peers. These are few enough that the government can effectively put pressure on them, and in turn make them put pressure on their clients, and so on back down the chain, until your ISP tells you to rate your stuff correctly, or you'll get booted, because they'd rather lose you than lose their whole business, because their ISP has just told them the same thing...
The guys who own the wire have the real power here, so they're the ones that need to be brought into line for the government to enforce this. Unfortunately, it may just be practical for them to do so. You think Sprint is going to go head-to-head with the Feds over what J. Random Webmaster puts on his home page?
Dunno about that capitalizing "paganism". Unlike Christianity or Judaism, it's not a specific form of religion. Certainly, Druidism, Wicca, Discordianism, and so on should be capitalized, but paganism isn't a religion, it's a term that describes a set of religions. Capitalizing it would be kind of like capitalizing "monotheism".
John Campbell, Agnostic Discordian
Coaxial Cabal
Sorta kinda pagan for a while now.
I can get to any site on the Internet with just one click! I just click on the "Location" bar and type in the URL...
Heehee... we played with thermite in Chemistry class in high school (my Chemistry teacher may not have been entirely sane). We mixed up about a quarter inch of the stuff in the bottom of a tuna can and set it off in one of the parking lots in the pouring rain. It was pretty impressive... when the magnesium burned down and the thermite went up, I could feel the wave of heat hit from fifteen feet away. Then the parking lot caught on fire and smoldered for quite a while despite the rain. What was left when it was all over was a misshapen lump of iron and ruby (yeah, that's what aluminum oxide is... if hot enough to melt iron isn't impressive, how about hot enough to melt ruby?).
Merced won't be an x86... Disclaimer: This is not an attempt to express an opinion either way on whether Microsoft could, would, or should create their own Linux distro.
I don't think it's a matter of strength so much as simply that SCO is the company that's standing most directly in front of the Linux steamroller. The other commercial Unix vendors are primarily hardware vendors. Sun and SGI aren't threatened by Linux, because they're not out to sell operating systems. They're out to sell the hardware. It doesn't matter much to them whether you run {Solaris,Irix} or Linux on it after you buy it. In some ways, Linux is advantageous to them... it frees them from having to devote the programmer-hours to develop and maintain the OS - that task gets done for them for free by the Linux community. SCO, on the other hand, is a software vendor. They sell an OS to run on readily available third-party hardware. Since SCO isn't making anything off the sale of the hardware, if Linux supplants SCO on that hardware, SCO is screwed... they no longer have a source of income. Companies without income don't last long. Even Microsoft has less cause to worry about Linux than SCO does. Though they're also a software vendor, Windows fills a different niche than Linux currently does, and so is less immediately threatened by Linux's growth. SCO, on the other hand, is an x86 Unix, just like Linux, so they're in direct competition for the same market. And Linux has the advantages of being free, open, and (arguably) simply better.
Intel is killing the x86 line anyway. We already knew that. If you want to pull the usual Mac zealot trick of comparing products that don't exist yet, try comparing future G4s to future IA64 chips, not to current Pentiums...
And if you know enough about Merced to make this comparison, I'd honestly like to hear it.
No, a 486 can't compare to a modern chip. That's exactly my point. You can't compare the processing power of two chips by comparing what kind of heat-dissipation equipment is attached to them. If the hypothesis that the G4 is faster because it has just a heat sink while the P-III needs a heat sink and fan is true, then it follows that this here 486-66 could whip both their tails, because it doesn't even need a heat sink. And my 8088, as you point out, is even better, because it not only doesn't have a heat sink, it's barely warm to the touch. Oh, and those big liquid-cooled supercomputers? Those things must just suck...
And my 486es don't even have heat sinks on them. What's your point?
So, uh... have you actually got any bats in that bat house yet?
And for the price of four G4s, you can get sixteen P-IIs...
The G4, on an absolute scale, is faster, but it's on the losing end of the price-performance ratio, and adding more of 'em isn't going to help that.
10) Just imagine how many MP3s you could store in all those brains....
Hmm... you could get a different song stuck in each head...
You forgot: 7) Yeah, but the real question is, will this operation make my head run Linux? and, of course: 8) F1RsT P05T D00D!!!!!!
BMP? BitMaP? Another Microsoft format...
('Cause everyone knows real hackers use XPM...)
:)
A real hacker is a guy who can do "cat > /vmlinuz" and have the machine boot afterward...