Let me ask something provocative - no, better, let me state something provocative: I for one love Shakespeare (and others, like Bunuel), and I could give a rat's back-part if it stands up to a reasonable logical scrutiny. I wrote it before, I don't love Shakespeare for his plots. Actually, I don't think three witches ever assembled to foresee the death of the king by the hand of a weakling pressured by his horrible wife. And I don't think that someone fearing soldiers creeping up the hill in disguise with twigs and leafs will actually have made a king in the first place. And don't ever get me started with some spirits of the air...
Look, matey, had you bothered to read the parent, and bothered to look up the two patents cited, you would have noted, that the USPTO fails miserably at following its own directives. Both patents clearly disclose a very old and very wrong assumption; that by rotating a magnet in an electric filed and switching the polarity, this magnet starts to spin from the rotated magnet field.
You are right w.r.t. the 'gem' on water treatment. I can only ask: how would one refute this application? Looking at the claims, it says nothing supernatural; that is only in the description. And now? Does a system of vortices like those described exist or not? If not, it is patentable. Even if - in the end - it is used for something quite different; and successfully so.
This is debatable. Though it lays open a major shortcoming in our days (as far as I can make out, at least): Everything seems to be run down to its business value; to its outer perspective. Be it a movie or a play. Almost all movies from the last 2 generations focus on realistic scenes, shootings, blood. Immersion. To me, movie is an art. Of images, camera shots and moves, dialogue, etc. that conveys moods, feelings, dreams, personal developments (very simplistic here). Okay, back to Shakespeare. What I like with Shakespeare is exactly the language, that is hugely powerful, etc. No, I absolutely do not desire any Hamlet as a Danish prince, who finds out who murdered the king, and takes ages to decide if he should seriously go for a revenge; and when he does, in the end almost everyone is dead. That would be a very boring Hamlet. At least to me.
You are correct, no doubt. That is what the patent system was meant for, initially, at its creation; and especially so the small inventor, who could otherwise never recover any costs if bigger industries 'stole' his / her idea. Alas, those days are gone, long gone, Were you a regular Slashdot reader, you would have noticed by now, I'd guess.
Or, if I followed quite another string of arguments, I suggest you find out (Dr. Google is your friend) how much your patent creator would have to invest, to fork out, to lay on the table, from his own pocket, before the court procedures would be through [how many years] for him to be able to recover the costs of only the proceedings. (I can give you a hint: utterly impossible for the small, eventually even the medium-size inventor - meaning the system is broken!)
Even here I cannot agree fully. Showing working code is one step, but one too few. The European Patent Convention (I am too lazy to look up the American Act) clearly states that 'presentation of information' is not patentable. And I don't care if this is in the American act or not; I cannot consider presentation of information - with or without working code - as patentable. Sure, that is just my opinion (and maybe the europeans), but I will have to be pressed hard to change this point of view. I do agree, that for eventually patentable stuff, a working example ought to be required. And not only for software. Think about a new mechanism for sending people to the moon, based on quantum physics. Then one could ask for a patent for sending someone up, and yet have no working prototype yet. Done, idea patented, and if it ever works in the lifetime of the patent, everyone actually doing it is screwed. And then they say, patents bolster inventiveness!
"Mon dernier souffle" - 'My last breath' in English. He explains what he 'learned' while being on a sponsorship in Hollywood. He wrote this story around 1980. He had but acquired one item on top of what he had already known and done before he arrived: Setting up a geneology of all American movies. One night someone dropped in and told him of a new movie with a totally unexpected, novel and revolutionary line. He wanted to hear of the first minutes, and then he said, he'd be able to construct the rest. And that actually worked! Actually, Bunuel was a trainee of Charly Chaplin in the thirties. I always consider it the wrong way round in who should have been the person to be the supervisor.;-)
All of this. While I agree with the reservations on EVs as 'vehicles of the future', we should not underestimate or, worse, forget, that a car running on petrol, diesel, etc. will always use non-regenerative fuel sources. An EV could - I repeat: - could be running from electricity coming from hydro-energy, wind energy, solar energy... you name it.
From what I can gather, people are using the "upload your contact list" / "connect to your email account" feature, without realizing that it automatically sends out invites to your contacts. I'm pretty sure it spells that out quite plainly, though; at least I vaguely recall that it did last time I decided not to use the feature.
Yep. That's what it says. I for one had selected some 7 contacts (me stupid had allowed access to my address book). Carefully selected. A give-away was already, that there was no 'deselect all'; only 'select all', and I had automatically 153 contacts pre-selected. What a fun, without a 'deselect all'. So I deselected some 146, one by one. 7 left. And me scrolling to double-check if they were the good ones. So I selected 7. Do you know how many were sent? 584.
Another give-away of LinkedIn malicious undertaking: 1. I never had to confirm those invites being sent. 2. (Worse) There is no way to retract invites not yet being opened or answered. No 'cancel all my invites'
Now it's your turn to show any 'best practices' by LinkedIn to me.
How is this not considered criminal activity? Could LinkedIn just be the target of a spoofing campaign? I have a hard time believing they could be so stupid.
No. Over. I submitted a story some three weeks ago on exactly the same; miraculously (??) mine was finally not accepted. It was the sad and silly story of how 584 invites were sent, without me actually authorising the sending. Including to a good hundred addresses of people where I had applied for a job, but obtained a refusal. The funniest was my landlord, who got an invite on the same day when he received my resignation from the rental contract. Partially out of disgust with his 'business model'. And he knew I was disgusted, and he must have deemed me mad for resigning out of frustration and the same day asking him to become a member of my professional network!? Hahaha! My story also contained the result of my search through the Forum at LinkedIn, and I found a thread started one week earlier, with plenty of people asking to retract their invites for similar reasons. And no answer from LinkedIn, at least by then.
Hahaha! I was totally tempted to send out to ALL my contacts (my list was harvested from my Gmail-account with my authorization). I spare everyone how I was snuggered into this - so partially I am to be blamed myself. But then I would have sent out a de-invite for some people that I had actually invited on purpose.
Enlighten me about that helicopter crash and......wait, now I spoiled it, and can't give you my 'Funny' Mod point for at least the last 2/3 of your post any longer.
HHI used to be the world championship in optical signal transmission beating their own records as early as the late 1970 and early 1980. I myself had the honour to work there, at that time, though not in optical transmission systems. The time spend there has always been a great and endearing reminiscence. I am proud of you, guys and girls! Congratulations! (I really wonder if anyone from those days is still there!?)
If there wasn't money to be made, nobody would have bothered to develop these drugs in the first place.
What, altruism? We all know humans are selfish pricks who would sooner laugh at cancer patients than help. Heck, there is a big push going on right now for euthanasia for cancer patients instead of going to all the trouble of trying to cure them.
I very much hope and think you targeted for 'funny' or 'flamebait' with your text!? Yes, we humans are a bunch of selfish pricks. But do we actually laugh at cancer patients? I don't think so. And euthanasia is not, usually, considered as alternative to treatment, but rather as a supplement when it doesn't get the patient where (s)he wants to go: into remission. To me both are just human: a treatment at the best of medical possibilities; not the maximum profits of patent holders; and the freedom to call it quits as a pure individual decision; not dictated by societal determinants like religion and a criminal law disallowing helping the individual to fulfill her desires with regard to her life.
Do you think younger folks are going to gravitate to the old design or to the new one as a matter of visual appeal? Designing for today will get you a dwindling user set. It might make sense to take a risk and work towards younger and upcoming users. In the end, everyone is going to be ending up on a UI that is going to take advantage of new hardware capabilities and the old stuff is going to quickly go.
Dear Sri Ramkrishna, alas, your venerable and in here highly respected - if not envied - 4-digit User ID betrays your continuing efforts to click with the youth of this world. Yes, and the old stuff is going to quickly go.
I myself am a culprit and lucky no plane crashed due my failure in following suggestions.:) Recently, someone passed an old handy of his to me, I was travelling overseas, and for the first time didn't have to swap SIM-cards. So I plugged my Malaysian SIM card in the new phone and left the German in the old one. Ah, you can guess what happened. Sure, I switched off the phone I had in my pocket. Alas, one too few. Very sorry, fellow passengers! Luckily you and me survived. Another scenario (aside from the multiple phones): I have an Android on me as well. So if it contains a SIM-card it needs to be switched off, though I am only reading or watching a movie; but if it doesn't, it is just a reading device? And what happens if I root a Swindle? And what is actually 'off' on my Android tablet? Usually it kind of hibernates once I haven't touched it for some time. Totally shutting it off would be a procedure I usually don't do. Hibernation or whatnot is fine? Despite of me (not?) being able to make calls? Personally, I consider myself a meticulous person. Not everyone is. And passenger Aunt Tilly will simply be unable to cope with the request in a 'technically correct way', and I wouldn't bet on her niece, an air-hostess, neither to differentiate properly.
This matter sounds as if a PhD in rocket science would be needed to follow instructions in a correct manner.
Look, if copying unimportant files crashes a system to unbootable, we ought not discuss and suggest other distros. We should beat the s***t out of that distro. because then they'd screwed up all ideas Unix and Linux beyond recognition. Any *nix distro that is allowed to exist must not allow this to happen, ever. Over.
"Nokia's declaration to the IETF says NO to royalty-free licensing and also NO to FRAND (fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory) licensing"
Good, NOKIA; just as you like. Shoot yourself into the foot or sign your own death-knell. From here on you are a NO-NO company, and I suggest to everybody in my circles to make a large stroll around any Nokia product and I will do so myself. This calls for collective punishment.
You should open System Settings before claiming that there is no easy way to disable Nepomuk. Akonadi is disabled by default because it only performs tasks after accounts have been set up. As long as you don't set up any mail accounts in Akonadi, its mail service doesn't start. As long as you don't create address book entries, the Akonadi address service does not start. As song as you don't add any dates into KOrganizer, the Akondai calendar service does not start.
I leave out the screenshot of my System Settings, with all three boxes unticked, probably since the installation. I have no memory of having set up mail accounts in Akonadi (how does one?), my only address book entries that I have deliberately created are in Thunderbird, and I have never opened Korganizer, as far as memory serves.
There is no Akonadi tray icon; and neither anything remotely named like that in the System Tray Settings. The installation was done in Juli, Kubuntu 12.04
Again: where is the Disable button that disables these applications? You see how invasive this software is.
Kugelkurt, the information is valuable, thanks. On the other hand, it is sufficient to put akonadi nepomuk into Google, and then the first 10 hits are either on what they ought to do (minority of hits) or how to disable them due to simply not working (majority of hits). And when you click on any of the minority hits, you'll find that all of those have a majority of people pointing out that these programs don't work. Effectively, I have yet to meet anyone for whom it does work personally. And when you look at the dates, this debacle has been going on for more than 4 years. Now don't come and tell me that I am just the unlucky one. This debacle has cost KDE a good number of its userbase. Where is the accountability? Where is the procedure in place, to kick out those applications as long as they are a pain in the lower back to > 90% of the users from the default settings? Where, and that's the most obvious one, is the one button to disable all of those? No, one needs to fiddle with/usr/share/autostart/nepomukserver.desktop; with akonadiserverrc, and so forth. There is currently a good window in time for KDE to get things right; with the idiotic GNOME, the limitations of xfce and lxde. Why being dickheaded then and force down some crappy and useless applications? Useless, because there is no GUI (yet) to actually make sense of the data as collected.
I'll give you my version of "worksforme": I am actually a bank-robber, you know, with a sawn-off shotgun, demanding cashiers to hand over money to me at gunpoint. Therefore I don't need to work, fortunately. I do understand that more than 80 percent of the bank-robbers are being caught and put behind bars. But I cannot fathom why!? I have never been caught. So why not try yourself, follow my example? If you happen to be caught, I'll say "I don't know what you did wrong? It simply worksforme!"
Pity you didn't get the mod points that you deserved. Because the Akonadi-Nepomuk disaster is well known, and has seen plenty of bug reports over the years.Alas, the KDE-PIM people are block-headed enough to simply ignore them ("works for me"). Actually, come to think of it, the real culprits are the KMail-people. Because the idea of a semantic desktop is great. Had it worked, we would not have seen the Vista disaster, and had it worked on KDE the great thing would be the complete integration of all 'personal' applications. Not entering your contacts in the mail client, the messenger, address book, scheduler, you name it. Logically, the semantic desktop needs to come and will come. Sooner or later. Therefore, working on it is fine, in principle. The idiotic idea is rather, to take a functional, if not mature, application of yours (KMail) and rip it apart. For the sole reason that you want to make it compliant with that futuristic semantic desktop. So that, once it arrives, some time into the future, in a year or three, eventually the next generation, then your application will work, again. That's the downside of a so-called community-based development: There is no way to kick someone's buttocks. There is no accountability. And no way for the community to stop a project from going bonkers. Lesson number one from the development model of a community-based Free Software: There is no way of stopping an egotistic maniac. From ruining a whole project. GNOME stands even more prominent here.
I don't have mod points, alas. Please, someone mod this up (and subsequently the others further up down). If only to set a signal, indicating that the discussion further up is - sorry - based on a lack of understanding. Nobody in their sane mind wants anything close to what we can see in the clip. Period. Not even the author. Over.
The alpha software is a demo for widgets, and interaction with shaders. Finished. Done. It also shows the almost revolutionary aspects of Qt5, probably the only toolkit that allows to 'write once and run anywhere' of interfaces; which must by definition be based on something other than a geometrical construct of frame borders in a pixel-based sense.
Come on, get a new life! Sure, those Akonadi-Nepomuk failures are a big hassle, and basing a mail client on a non-functional database is plain stupid. Done and over. Switch off those buggers, learn to live with Thunderbird, and you might find the more recent KDEs quite suitable. At least here, I could not second your opinion of crash-friendliness. Not with 4.5 and onward. At least, I am a rather recent KDE convert, since it allows me to configure my desktop as I so desire with a lot of edge events and basically panel-less.
And while I was an Apple-advocat myself, recent developments at Apple would make me think thrice before throwing my money at them. YMMV.
Slashdot Mirror
It seems there is no Shake-App yet to un-bore our William?
I don't reply to ACs.
Yep. But is has been patented (or just not), so your argument is rather futile in this respect.
Let me ask something provocative - no, better, let me state something provocative: I for one love Shakespeare (and others, like Bunuel), and I could give a rat's back-part if it stands up to a reasonable logical scrutiny. I wrote it before, I don't love Shakespeare for his plots. Actually, I don't think three witches ever assembled to foresee the death of the king by the hand of a weakling pressured by his horrible wife. And I don't think that someone fearing soldiers creeping up the hill in disguise with twigs and leafs will actually have made a king in the first place. ...
And don't ever get me started with some spirits of the air
Look, matey, had you bothered to read the parent, and bothered to look up the two patents cited, you would have noted, that the USPTO fails miserably at following its own directives.
Both patents clearly disclose a very old and very wrong assumption; that by rotating a magnet in an electric filed and switching the polarity, this magnet starts to spin from the rotated magnet field.
You are right w.r.t. the 'gem' on water treatment. I can only ask: how would one refute this application? Looking at the claims, it says nothing supernatural; that is only in the description. And now? Does a system of vortices like those described exist or not? If not, it is patentable. Even if - in the end - it is used for something quite different; and successfully so.
This is debatable. Though it lays open a major shortcoming in our days (as far as I can make out, at least): Everything seems to be run down to its business value; to its outer perspective. Be it a movie or a play. Almost all movies from the last 2 generations focus on realistic scenes, shootings, blood. Immersion. To me, movie is an art. Of images, camera shots and moves, dialogue, etc. that conveys moods, feelings, dreams, personal developments (very simplistic here).
Okay, back to Shakespeare. What I like with Shakespeare is exactly the language, that is hugely powerful, etc. No, I absolutely do not desire any Hamlet as a Danish prince, who finds out who murdered the king, and takes ages to decide if he should seriously go for a revenge; and when he does, in the end almost everyone is dead. That would be a very boring Hamlet. At least to me.
You are correct, no doubt. That is what the patent system was meant for, initially, at its creation; and especially so the small inventor, who could otherwise never recover any costs if bigger industries 'stole' his / her idea.
Alas, those days are gone, long gone, Were you a regular Slashdot reader, you would have noticed by now, I'd guess.
Or, if I followed quite another string of arguments, I suggest you find out (Dr. Google is your friend) how much your patent creator would have to invest, to fork out, to lay on the table, from his own pocket, before the court procedures would be through [how many years] for him to be able to recover the costs of only the proceedings.
(I can give you a hint: utterly impossible for the small, eventually even the medium-size inventor - meaning the system is broken!)
Even here I cannot agree fully. Showing working code is one step, but one too few.
The European Patent Convention (I am too lazy to look up the American Act) clearly states that 'presentation of information' is not patentable. And I don't care if this is in the American act or not; I cannot consider presentation of information - with or without working code - as patentable. Sure, that is just my opinion (and maybe the europeans), but I will have to be pressed hard to change this point of view.
I do agree, that for eventually patentable stuff, a working example ought to be required. And not only for software. Think about a new mechanism for sending people to the moon, based on quantum physics. Then one could ask for a patent for sending someone up, and yet have no working prototype yet. Done, idea patented, and if it ever works in the lifetime of the patent, everyone actually doing it is screwed. And then they say, patents bolster inventiveness!
This is getting silly, silly, silly.
"Mon dernier souffle" - 'My last breath' in English. ;-)
He explains what he 'learned' while being on a sponsorship in Hollywood. He wrote this story around 1980. He had but acquired one item on top of what he had already known and done before he arrived: Setting up a geneology of all American movies. One night someone dropped in and told him of a new movie with a totally unexpected, novel and revolutionary line. He wanted to hear of the first minutes, and then he said, he'd be able to construct the rest. And that actually worked!
Actually, Bunuel was a trainee of Charly Chaplin in the thirties. I always consider it the wrong way round in who should have been the person to be the supervisor.
All of this. While I agree with the reservations on EVs as 'vehicles of the future', we should not underestimate or, worse, forget, that a car running on petrol, diesel, etc. will always use non-regenerative fuel sources. An EV could - I repeat: - could be running from electricity coming from hydro-energy, wind energy, solar energy ... you name it.
From what I can gather, people are using the "upload your contact list" / "connect to your email account" feature, without realizing that it automatically sends out invites to your contacts. I'm pretty sure it spells that out quite plainly, though; at least I vaguely recall that it did last time I decided not to use the feature.
Yep. That's what it says. I for one had selected some 7 contacts (me stupid had allowed access to my address book). Carefully selected. A give-away was already, that there was no 'deselect all'; only 'select all', and I had automatically 153 contacts pre-selected. What a fun, without a 'deselect all'. So I deselected some 146, one by one. 7 left. And me scrolling to double-check if they were the good ones. So I selected 7. Do you know how many were sent? 584.
Another give-away of LinkedIn malicious undertaking:
1. I never had to confirm those invites being sent.
2. (Worse) There is no way to retract invites not yet being opened or answered. No 'cancel all my invites'
Now it's your turn to show any 'best practices' by LinkedIn to me.
How is this not considered criminal activity? Could LinkedIn just be the target of a spoofing campaign? I have a hard time believing they could be so stupid.
No. Over.
I submitted a story some three weeks ago on exactly the same; miraculously (??) mine was finally not accepted. It was the sad and silly story of how 584 invites were sent, without me actually authorising the sending. Including to a good hundred addresses of people where I had applied for a job, but obtained a refusal. The funniest was my landlord, who got an invite on the same day when he received my resignation from the rental contract. Partially out of disgust with his 'business model'. And he knew I was disgusted, and he must have deemed me mad for resigning out of frustration and the same day asking him to become a member of my professional network!? Hahaha!
My story also contained the result of my search through the Forum at LinkedIn, and I found a thread started one week earlier, with plenty of people asking to retract their invites for similar reasons. And no answer from LinkedIn, at least by then.
Hahaha! I was totally tempted to send out to ALL my contacts (my list was harvested from my Gmail-account with my authorization). I spare everyone how I was snuggered into this - so partially I am to be blamed myself. But then I would have sent out a de-invite for some people that I had actually invited on purpose.
Enlighten me about that helicopter crash and ... ...wait, now I spoiled it, and can't give you my 'Funny' Mod point for at least the last 2/3 of your post any longer.
HHI used to be the world championship in optical signal transmission beating their own records as early as the late 1970 and early 1980. I myself had the honour to work there, at that time, though not in optical transmission systems. The time spend there has always been a great and endearing reminiscence.
I am proud of you, guys and girls! Congratulations!
(I really wonder if anyone from those days is still there!?)
If there wasn't money to be made, nobody would have bothered to develop these drugs in the first place.
What, altruism? We all know humans are selfish pricks who would sooner laugh at cancer patients than help. Heck, there is a big push going on right now for euthanasia for cancer patients instead of going to all the trouble of trying to cure them.
I very much hope and think you targeted for 'funny' or 'flamebait' with your text!?
Yes, we humans are a bunch of selfish pricks. But do we actually laugh at cancer patients? I don't think so.
And euthanasia is not, usually, considered as alternative to treatment, but rather as a supplement when it doesn't get the patient where (s)he wants to go: into remission.
To me both are just human: a treatment at the best of medical possibilities; not the maximum profits of patent holders; and the freedom to call it quits as a pure individual decision; not dictated by societal determinants like religion and a criminal law disallowing helping the individual to fulfill her desires with regard to her life.
Do you think younger folks are going to gravitate to the old design or to the new one as a matter of visual appeal? Designing for today will get you a dwindling user set. It might make sense to take a risk and work towards younger and upcoming users. In the end, everyone is going to be ending up on a UI that is going to take advantage of new hardware capabilities and the old stuff is going to quickly go.
Dear Sri Ramkrishna, alas, your venerable and in here highly respected - if not envied - 4-digit User ID betrays your continuing efforts to click with the youth of this world.
Yes, and the old stuff is going to quickly go.
I myself am a culprit and lucky no plane crashed due my failure in following suggestions. :)
Recently, someone passed an old handy of his to me, I was travelling overseas, and for the first time didn't have to swap SIM-cards. So I plugged my Malaysian SIM card in the new phone and left the German in the old one. Ah, you can guess what happened. Sure, I switched off the phone I had in my pocket. Alas, one too few. Very sorry, fellow passengers! Luckily you and me survived.
Another scenario (aside from the multiple phones): I have an Android on me as well. So if it contains a SIM-card it needs to be switched off, though I am only reading or watching a movie; but if it doesn't, it is just a reading device? And what happens if I root a Swindle?
And what is actually 'off' on my Android tablet? Usually it kind of hibernates once I haven't touched it for some time. Totally shutting it off would be a procedure I usually don't do. Hibernation or whatnot is fine? Despite of me (not?) being able to make calls?
Personally, I consider myself a meticulous person. Not everyone is. And passenger Aunt Tilly will simply be unable to cope with the request in a 'technically correct way', and I wouldn't bet on her niece, an air-hostess, neither to differentiate properly.
This matter sounds as if a PhD in rocket science would be needed to follow instructions in a correct manner.
Look, if copying unimportant files crashes a system to unbootable, we ought not discuss and suggest other distros. We should beat the s***t out of that distro. because then they'd screwed up all ideas Unix and Linux beyond recognition.
Any *nix distro that is allowed to exist must not allow this to happen, ever. Over.
"Nokia's declaration to the IETF says NO to royalty-free licensing and also NO to FRAND (fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory) licensing"
Good, NOKIA; just as you like. Shoot yourself into the foot or sign your own death-knell. From here on you are a NO-NO company, and I suggest to everybody in my circles to make a large stroll around any Nokia product and I will do so myself.
This calls for collective punishment.
DIE, NOKIA; DIE!
You should open System Settings before claiming that there is no easy way to disable Nepomuk.
Akonadi is disabled by default because it only performs tasks after accounts have been set up. As long as you don't set up any mail accounts in Akonadi, its mail service doesn't start. As long as you don't create address book entries, the Akonadi address service does not start. As song as you don't add any dates into KOrganizer, the Akondai calendar service does not start.
I leave out the screenshot of my System Settings, with all three boxes unticked, probably since the installation.
I have no memory of having set up mail accounts in Akonadi (how does one?), my only address book entries that I have deliberately created are in Thunderbird, and I have never opened Korganizer, as far as memory serves.
For these, I find quite some applications running here. ;) /usr/bin/akonadi_control /usr/sbin/mysqld[...] /usr/bin/akonadi_agent_launcher akonadi_akonotes_resource akonadi_akonotes_resource_0 /usr/bin/akonadi_archivemail_agent --identifier akonadi_archivemail_agent /usr/bin/akonadi_agent_launcher akonadi_contacts_resource akonadi_contacts_resource_0 /usr/bin/akonadi_agent_launcher akonadi_ical_resource akonadi_ical_resource_0 /usr/bin/akonadi_imap_resource --identifier akonadi_imap_resource_0 /usr/bin/akonadi_agent_launcher akonadi_maildir_resource akonadi_maildir_resource_0 /usr/bin/akonadi_maildispatcher_agent --identifier akonadi_maildispatcher_agent /usr/bin/akonadi_mailfilter_agent --identifier akonadi_mailfilter_agent /usr/bin/akonadi_nepomuk_feeder --identifier akonadi_nepomuk_feeder
$ ps ax | grep konad
2261 ? Sl 0:00
2263 ? Sl 0:01 akonadiserver
2266 ? Sl 0:24
2402 ? Sl 0:00
2403 ? S 0:00
2404 ? Sl 0:00
2405 ? Sl 0:00
2406 ? S 0:00
2407 ? Sl 0:00
2410 ? S 0:00
2411 ? S 0:00
2412 ? Sl 0:00
$ ps ax | grep epom /usr/bin/akonadi_nepomuk_feeder --identifier akonadi_nepomuk_feeder
2412 ? Sl 0:00
There is no Akonadi tray icon; and neither anything remotely named like that in the System Tray Settings.
The installation was done in Juli, Kubuntu 12.04
Again: where is the Disable button that disables these applications? You see how invasive this software is.
Kugelkurt, the information is valuable, thanks. /usr/share/autostart/nepomukserver.desktop; with akonadiserverrc, and so forth. There is currently a good window in time for KDE to get things right; with the idiotic GNOME, the limitations of xfce and lxde. Why being dickheaded then and force down some crappy and useless applications? Useless, because there is no GUI (yet) to actually make sense of the data as collected.
On the other hand, it is sufficient to put akonadi nepomuk into Google, and then the first 10 hits are either on what they ought to do (minority of hits) or how to disable them due to simply not working (majority of hits). And when you click on any of the minority hits, you'll find that all of those have a majority of people pointing out that these programs don't work. Effectively, I have yet to meet anyone for whom it does work personally.
And when you look at the dates, this debacle has been going on for more than 4 years.
Now don't come and tell me that I am just the unlucky one. This debacle has cost KDE a good number of its userbase. Where is the accountability? Where is the procedure in place, to kick out those applications as long as they are a pain in the lower back to > 90% of the users from the default settings?
Where, and that's the most obvious one, is the one button to disable all of those? No, one needs to fiddle with
I'll give you my version of "worksforme":
I am actually a bank-robber, you know, with a sawn-off shotgun, demanding cashiers to hand over money to me at gunpoint. Therefore I don't need to work, fortunately. I do understand that more than 80 percent of the bank-robbers are being caught and put behind bars. But I cannot fathom why!? I have never been caught. So why not try yourself, follow my example? If you happen to be caught, I'll say "I don't know what you did wrong? It simply worksforme!"
Pity you didn't get the mod points that you deserved.
Because the Akonadi-Nepomuk disaster is well known, and has seen plenty of bug reports over the years.Alas, the KDE-PIM people are block-headed enough to simply ignore them ("works for me").
Actually, come to think of it, the real culprits are the KMail-people. Because the idea of a semantic desktop is great. Had it worked, we would not have seen the Vista disaster, and had it worked on KDE the great thing would be the complete integration of all 'personal' applications. Not entering your contacts in the mail client, the messenger, address book, scheduler, you name it. Logically, the semantic desktop needs to come and will come. Sooner or later. Therefore, working on it is fine, in principle.
The idiotic idea is rather, to take a functional, if not mature, application of yours (KMail) and rip it apart. For the sole reason that you want to make it compliant with that futuristic semantic desktop. So that, once it arrives, some time into the future, in a year or three, eventually the next generation, then your application will work, again.
That's the downside of a so-called community-based development: There is no way to kick someone's buttocks. There is no accountability. And no way for the community to stop a project from going bonkers. Lesson number one from the development model of a community-based Free Software: There is no way of stopping an egotistic maniac. From ruining a whole project. GNOME stands even more prominent here.
I don't have mod points, alas.
Please, someone mod this up (and subsequently the others further up down). If only to set a signal, indicating that the discussion further up is - sorry - based on a lack of understanding. Nobody in their sane mind wants anything close to what we can see in the clip. Period. Not even the author. Over.
The alpha software is a demo for widgets, and interaction with shaders. Finished. Done.
It also shows the almost revolutionary aspects of Qt5, probably the only toolkit that allows to 'write once and run anywhere' of interfaces; which must by definition be based on something other than a geometrical construct of frame borders in a pixel-based sense.
Is this now an argument in favour of KDE?
Or is it orthogonal to the question of Desktop Environments?
Come on, get a new life!
Sure, those Akonadi-Nepomuk failures are a big hassle, and basing a mail client on a non-functional database is plain stupid.
Done and over.
Switch off those buggers, learn to live with Thunderbird, and you might find the more recent KDEs quite suitable. At least here, I could not second your opinion of crash-friendliness. Not with 4.5 and onward.
At least, I am a rather recent KDE convert, since it allows me to configure my desktop as I so desire with a lot of edge events and basically panel-less.
And while I was an Apple-advocat myself, recent developments at Apple would make me think thrice before throwing my money at them.
YMMV.