That's quite an incredible program there, it's tetris by the way and it works very well. Good job, I'm sad it cost you your karma.
As a token effort to make this post on topic, I'd like to say that it's great to see Novell making another show of faith in linux's ability, this time trusting that it is usable right now, rather than in the future. My father installed ubuntu two days ago after a bought of frustration with Microsoft's planned abandonment of 2k and he seemed fairly impressed with Evolution (now a Novell product). Novell have done many good things, particually with gnome and it will be great to see them reaping the rewards of their contributions in their own office.
Here's a better analogy: a rich country was using a nice network with well bred routers. They were going about, transferring data, maintaining the network. The rest of the world says "wow, thats nice. I like that." Then as time goes on the world attaches their networks to it and it all works very nicely as a single giant network owned by many people but run by the country. Then the rich country lets one of its appointed custodians do stupid things, like redirecting all non-existing.com to a dumb search page. So the UN says "hey, why don't you let us look after your network as well as everyone else's because more people trust us?. The country replies that it wouldn't like that at all. So the UN meets to decide on a course of action, and of cause inevitably they will still be deciding on a course of action because the UN can't really agree on anything properly.
On the third hand, whether males or females are better at this job is completely irrelevant while it remains the case that by far the majority of interest is the field comes from males. If more males are drawn to the field but the numbers are artificially through either policy or something less concrete, then it becomes logical that more males are being rejected than females. Thus if this became the case then there would actually be a huge difference in the average skill level of the two sexes and females on average would be inferior, dispite there being no inherant difference on a case by case basis.
Even now there is some tension caused by women who are clearly not of the right temperament and have no interest in the field being coaxed into engineering against the best interests of their future happiness by recruitment campaigns led by females engineers who want to believe that they arn't actually a rarity and male engineers who want their field to be more glamorous and have it in their minds that women should follow a career based on the arrangement that would make it easiest to "hang with chicks at the office" and make him feel charismatic and slightly less of a male stereotype.
The trend towards women in engineering scholarships and female friendly alternate entry schemes in the name of diversity make it so much easier for a woman to become qualified in engineering that it will do nothing but encourage people who do not have the capacity to be engineers to join on the grounds of their sex and eventually cause talented female engineers to be tainted by association and cause resentment even towards the good female engineers from male engineers that did not get the same opportunities that they did (or at least this is what is perceived). I do not see how this could help any engineers of any sex.
Phonics advocates forget about the most interesting dilemma in didactics: no two people learn in the same way. I'd say about 30% of people can't learn words as wholes and 30% can't learn words with phonics. I can read new words very well never being taught phonics and (as I see it) the whole point of phonics is being able to ditch it when you can otherwise nobody will have decent reading speed. I went to kindergarten in 1989, my younger brother went in 1997 and neither of us were taught phonics since it was thoroughly uncool in those days (or at least our our schools), however for some reason I can learn words I've never seen before, but he can't unless someone says it to him. My brother pronounced the word "terminal" (the adjective) as "timo" for many months, I can't even comprehend how crappy his understanding of sounds would have to be to read it like that. I've never had that problem, at all, whole word learning method worked perfectly for me, any work in phonics would have been a waste of time that would have been better used for other things. Yet we both had the same upbringing, the same family and similar genes.
Frankly, I think modern teaching theory is a bit of a joke. There is much debate about how is best to teach students without the acknowledgment that whatever is chosen, it will only be right for a small percentage of population. Personally, I think it would be most productive to try to map learning technique effectiveness onto some other metric (such as IQ, gender, cultural upbringing or an assessment of some psychological profile) and try to have classes that can all be taught in the same way using this mapping.
Seriously. It seems ironic that this comes up now. QT being proprietary was the reason Gnome was started in the first place and QT becoming GPL is why KDE still exists. In all fairness, desktop fragmentation was not intentional malice on the part of Trolltech; but it is a result of QT regardless of technical merits and I suggest that QT probably isn't the answer to solve desktop fragmentation.
I would dismiss this as technically impossible but nonetheless conjecture that if KDE dumped QT and moved to a community developed widget system that did not use something like moc but still had the structural and functional benefits that KDE fans keep extolling then Gnome possibly would cease to be. QT may well be the technically better solution but for a consensus this isn't wholly relevant. As it is, QT's centralized, commercially driven development, it's history and it's use of pre-compilers invoke many hostile reactions from a broad spectrum of developers. QT will NEVER be accepted as the de-facto Linux widget set simply because to hard core ideologically driven members of the community it just represents (rightly or wrongly) something that is contrary to the spirit of the community. Though QT is GPL, it is resented by many because of it's licensing structure. People see the Linux desktop as their own and do not see why it should be Trolltech that be the one to tax proprietary software on it when so many others put just as much work into creating the whole system, especially since QT was happy to be proprietary itself for a number of years.
This is not a troll meant to insight rage; this is not meant to be a bikeshed topic that I feel I am insightful for bringing up but am not; I am simply expressing an opinion that is widespread within the community. QT is fine as an optional tool to have on the desktop, but to assume the position of de-facto standard it would have to represent something that is agreed upon by the whole OSS community, technically, ideologically and historically.
If one is looking for unification candidates, GTK+ is a marginally better alternative since it has been community driven from the onset, is supported by more languages including it's excellent c++ port gtkmm. However GTK+ too has gained a foul reputation from the KDE camp. What I can say is that if someone associated with KDE wrote a new widget toolkit, it wouldn't be long until GTK+ could run using it just like it can run using the windows buttons with gtk-wimp. Why QT never started using GTK+ as it's backend under linux is beyond me, that would have been more consistent to the overall QT strategy and it would have really helped their bottom line since they probably don't make much profit on their linux port anyway.
I'd imagine that it would be because of the mobile phone standard. IIRC Asia-pacific mainly uses GSM and to a lesser extent CDMA. Probably Motorola has itself geared towards GSM production or something. But really, I'm just speculating. These things probably arn't as much of issues as they used to be.
Now remember, nomatter what happens with Microsoft and the Vietnamese government or making censorship software for China, it's still Linux that's the un-democratic, commie OS that is against the principles of the United States, freedom, peace and everything that is fair and just.
If you say otherwise you're just a commie too. Good freedom loving software is made in Redmond.
Linux's GUI problems don't really lie in everyone doing their own thing. Linux's GUI problem lies in QT starting as proprietary, leading to the creation of Gnome, but then going GPL leading to the continuance of KDE. This situation was highly unfortunate but was pretty much just a case of everything coming together in exactly the wrong order, hopefully such things will happen less and less with a faster moving development community.
Gnome and KDE developers don't like having to tell people to keep their apps separated but for now it is an inevitability.
Interestingly enough, most smart females I know with large heads tend to be good at maths and science, traditionally male strongpoints.
However this probably isn't statistically valid, since because of personal bias I don't tend to consider anyone smart unless they are good at maths and science to begin with. Also, since I am a slashdotter, the sample space is very small. To be honest, I think my theory is garbage but it is a fun coincidence.
Oliver Cromwell managed to take over England and rule it for the rest of his life as a dictator while convincing everyone that it was a republic. Most people I know couldn't do that, including myself.
There's also a difference in motivation. "Linux people do what they do because they hate Microsoft. We do what we do because we love Unix," De Raadt says. The irony, however, is that while noisy Linux fanatics make a great deal out of their hatred for Microsoft (nasdaq: MSFT - news - people ), De Raadt says their beloved program is starting to look a lot like what Microsoft puts out. "They have the same rapid development cycle, which leads to crap," he says.
OpenBSD people evidently do what they do because they hate Linux, NetBSD and FreeBSD and have a dismissive opinion of Windows. It always amazes me when someone like Mr de Raadt tries to claim that Linux is wholly driven by a deep dissagreeable nature, especially given his history with the Net BSD project. Maybe he could have proved that he was only motivated by love of UNIX if he managed to swallow his pride and cooperate with Net BSD and possibly held his tongue with respect to Linux. However he shows us time and time again that what he does is all for ego and to degrade other open OSs.
SVG provides an easy mechanism to store complex sequences of filter operations and apply them to objects as required. There are filters like blur, color matrix, convolve matrix, phong specular and diffuse lighting and many others. I wrote the implementation of them for librsvg, but it's a shame that more editors don't support their creation. Otherwise it would be great fun for all.
I use Gentoo. Compared to Gentoo, Debian greets the user with open arms, champagne in an ice bucket and complimentary mints on the pillow. You'd be supprised to find out how many users are willing to forget about twenty minutes of ugliness as long as it doesn't come back after installation. Back when I was in highschool, I installed Mandrake on my PC with an installer half as elegant as what debian has, I hardly think the installer would be a problem for new users' intuition. Anyone less superficial than a cheerleader (or an OSNews reviewer) should be able to get over the looks.
I hope feeding trolls is a little like feeding wild birds, they'll starve in the wild as soon as I stop doing it.
I hate to write in sympathy for MS, but this exploitation is something that I personally wouldn't wish on anyone.
It seems to me that this guy just thought of something that he knew Microsoft had to implement on their own sometime and then blackmailed them for it. This tactics of explicitly mentioning someone's products in a patent and demanding that they pay to simply add an obvious feature is something that not even MS has stooped to yet. I really hope that this teaches Microsoft that patents are not their friends, rather than simply learning a new trick out of it.
I hope this guy spends his new money on cigarettes and hookers with VDs.
Did anyone check out the date of that prediction that "Apple Computer Corp. will switch to Intel processors within the next 12 to 18 months."?
03.18.03
He was wrong. He was off by a year. Not only that, but he said that apple would switch to Itanium, which is he was right about, his point about Linux becomes moot.
You do realise that the content of all torahs are all identical don't you. Otherwise they would be pretty heretical. All torah checksums would therefore be the same. Pretty dumb way to authenticate them if you ask me.
Interestingly enough, if my memory serves me, things similar to MD5 hashes were used by scribes (Jewish, Christian and Islamic as well as probably others) for centuries to verify that they had properly copied their scriptures (usually recorded seperately).
but losing e-mail for a day sounds like it turned into a positive experience for the authors
Similarly, accidental castration would probably make me more a more sensitive person, being wrongfully incarcerated would teach me to look after myself in all situations and getting terminal cancer would teach me the value of life. That doesn't mean I'd like any of those things to happen.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm a Gnome developer (librsvg) and longtime user. It was meant as a joke, have a sence of humour about it.
Something which might be a little better to use if it didn't have its features so closely audited. See: Gnome.
As a token effort to make this post on topic, I'd like to say that it's great to see Novell making another show of faith in linux's ability, this time trusting that it is usable right now, rather than in the future. My father installed ubuntu two days ago after a bought of frustration with Microsoft's planned abandonment of 2k and he seemed fairly impressed with Evolution (now a Novell product). Novell have done many good things, particually with gnome and it will be great to see them reaping the rewards of their contributions in their own office.
Here's a better analogy: a rich country was using a nice network with well bred routers. They were going about, transferring data, maintaining the network. The rest of the world says "wow, thats nice. I like that." Then as time goes on the world attaches their networks to it and it all works very nicely as a single giant network owned by many people but run by the country. Then the rich country lets one of its appointed custodians do stupid things, like redirecting all non-existing .com to a dumb search page. So the UN says "hey, why don't you let us look after your network as well as everyone else's because more people trust us?. The country replies that it wouldn't like that at all. So the UN meets to decide on a course of action, and of cause inevitably they will still be deciding on a course of action because the UN can't really agree on anything properly.
I was going to say on the gripping hand but I edited it out before posting because it made me sound like too much of a nerd.
Even now there is some tension caused by women who are clearly not of the right temperament and have no interest in the field being coaxed into engineering against the best interests of their future happiness by recruitment campaigns led by females engineers who want to believe that they arn't actually a rarity and male engineers who want their field to be more glamorous and have it in their minds that women should follow a career based on the arrangement that would make it easiest to "hang with chicks at the office" and make him feel charismatic and slightly less of a male stereotype.
The trend towards women in engineering scholarships and female friendly alternate entry schemes in the name of diversity make it so much easier for a woman to become qualified in engineering that it will do nothing but encourage people who do not have the capacity to be engineers to join on the grounds of their sex and eventually cause talented female engineers to be tainted by association and cause resentment even towards the good female engineers from male engineers that did not get the same opportunities that they did (or at least this is what is perceived). I do not see how this could help any engineers of any sex.
Frankly, I think modern teaching theory is a bit of a joke. There is much debate about how is best to teach students without the acknowledgment that whatever is chosen, it will only be right for a small percentage of population. Personally, I think it would be most productive to try to map learning technique effectiveness onto some other metric (such as IQ, gender, cultural upbringing or an assessment of some psychological profile) and try to have classes that can all be taught in the same way using this mapping.
I would dismiss this as technically impossible but nonetheless conjecture that if KDE dumped QT and moved to a community developed widget system that did not use something like moc but still had the structural and functional benefits that KDE fans keep extolling then Gnome possibly would cease to be. QT may well be the technically better solution but for a consensus this isn't wholly relevant. As it is, QT's centralized, commercially driven development, it's history and it's use of pre-compilers invoke many hostile reactions from a broad spectrum of developers. QT will NEVER be accepted as the de-facto Linux widget set simply because to hard core ideologically driven members of the community it just represents (rightly or wrongly) something that is contrary to the spirit of the community. Though QT is GPL, it is resented by many because of it's licensing structure. People see the Linux desktop as their own and do not see why it should be Trolltech that be the one to tax proprietary software on it when so many others put just as much work into creating the whole system, especially since QT was happy to be proprietary itself for a number of years.
This is not a troll meant to insight rage; this is not meant to be a bikeshed topic that I feel I am insightful for bringing up but am not; I am simply expressing an opinion that is widespread within the community. QT is fine as an optional tool to have on the desktop, but to assume the position of de-facto standard it would have to represent something that is agreed upon by the whole OSS community, technically, ideologically and historically.
If one is looking for unification candidates, GTK+ is a marginally better alternative since it has been community driven from the onset, is supported by more languages including it's excellent c++ port gtkmm. However GTK+ too has gained a foul reputation from the KDE camp. What I can say is that if someone associated with KDE wrote a new widget toolkit, it wouldn't be long until GTK+ could run using it just like it can run using the windows buttons with gtk-wimp. Why QT never started using GTK+ as it's backend under linux is beyond me, that would have been more consistent to the overall QT strategy and it would have really helped their bottom line since they probably don't make much profit on their linux port anyway.
I'd imagine that it would be because of the mobile phone standard. IIRC Asia-pacific mainly uses GSM and to a lesser extent CDMA. Probably Motorola has itself geared towards GSM production or something. But really, I'm just speculating. These things probably arn't as much of issues as they used to be.
If you say otherwise you're just a commie too. Good freedom loving software is made in Redmond.
Gnome and KDE developers don't like having to tell people to keep their apps separated but for now it is an inevitability.
However this probably isn't statistically valid, since because of personal bias I don't tend to consider anyone smart unless they are good at maths and science to begin with. Also, since I am a slashdotter, the sample space is very small. To be honest, I think my theory is garbage but it is a fun coincidence.
Oliver Cromwell managed to take over England and rule it for the rest of his life as a dictator while convincing everyone that it was a republic. Most people I know couldn't do that, including myself.
OpenBSD people evidently do what they do because they hate Linux, NetBSD and FreeBSD and have a dismissive opinion of Windows. It always amazes me when someone like Mr de Raadt tries to claim that Linux is wholly driven by a deep dissagreeable nature, especially given his history with the Net BSD project. Maybe he could have proved that he was only motivated by love of UNIX if he managed to swallow his pride and cooperate with Net BSD and possibly held his tongue with respect to Linux. However he shows us time and time again that what he does is all for ego and to degrade other open OSs.
SVG provides an easy mechanism to store complex sequences of filter operations and apply them to objects as required. There are filters like blur, color matrix, convolve matrix, phong specular and diffuse lighting and many others. I wrote the implementation of them for librsvg, but it's a shame that more editors don't support their creation. Otherwise it would be great fun for all.
We can only hope the answer is: "one step closer to serious antitrust procedings".
I hope feeding trolls is a little like feeding wild birds, they'll starve in the wild as soon as I stop doing it.
I'm not a fan of being mellow.
It seems to me that this guy just thought of something that he knew Microsoft had to implement on their own sometime and then blackmailed them for it. This tactics of explicitly mentioning someone's products in a patent and demanding that they pay to simply add an obvious feature is something that not even MS has stooped to yet. I really hope that this teaches Microsoft that patents are not their friends, rather than simply learning a new trick out of it.
I hope this guy spends his new money on cigarettes and hookers with VDs.
03.18.03
He was wrong. He was off by a year. Not only that, but he said that apple would switch to Itanium, which is he was right about, his point about Linux becomes moot.
John C. Dvorak is a pompous windbag. That is all.
You do realise that the content of all torahs are all identical don't you. Otherwise they would be pretty heretical. All torah checksums would therefore be the same. Pretty dumb way to authenticate them if you ask me.
Interestingly enough, if my memory serves me, things similar to MD5 hashes were used by scribes (Jewish, Christian and Islamic as well as probably others) for centuries to verify that they had properly copied their scriptures (usually recorded seperately).
Um, how is email hardware?