"Now, if you go into any particular IRC room... even a "tech" room... the noise level dwarfs the signal..."
Sorry, but you just need to know where to go. And no, I'm not mentioning any channels on slashdot.
Somewhat offtopic, I recently discovered the song "Wake Me Up When September Ends" by a band called Green Day. It's not great or anything, but the title and some lyrics are strangely funny and appropriate. People who get the unintentional (?) joke may want to listen to it:-)
Re:part 2- not trolling, just a little frustrated
on
OpenBSD 3.8 Released
·
· Score: 1
The others have already mentioned the boot CD + FTP, but I'd like to add that OpenBSD is even easier to install entirely over the network. There's no need to waste time and natural resources burning anything to a CD.
This is very easy to do, and all you need is DHCP and TFTP on another machine. The rest of the process is exactly the same. See PXEBOOT(8).
"That said, I may be able to help you out. Check out beanshell"
Thanks, I'll do that - it looks very interesting. MSH has one nasty advantage, though, and it relates to what you said here:
"But as someone else in this discussion pointed out, the power of pipes on *nix isn't the pipe so much as the wide array of small efficient pipefitting commands that have evolved over time."
MSH is going to become the standard Windows shell, and all utilities from now on will be written to support its advanced features, while any unix program will still have to target the lowest common denominator. Sure, someone can write an advanced version of ls for beanshell, but no one else is going to use it, it's going to be incompatible with everything else, and it's impossible to recreate every utility just for one shell.
"What can't you do, anyway? I've yet to find a problem I couldn't solve using Bash, Perl and/or Gawk. And maybe a command line SQL interpreter."
It's not that I can't get something done now, but some of the features make me think everything could be so much more elegant. I'm not sure how to argue the point, but to me piping objects instead of text streams seems incredibly more powerful.
"You're the one who brought up all this necessity for the object oriented equipment because, according to the current thread of arguments, most programmers just don't seem to be capable of post-processing of plaintext output from the standard set of command line tools. Oh the slavery of putting the brain to work."
Yeah, because *real* programmers would rather maintain unreadable parsers than just tell the environment to retrieve one labeled part of the output. Don't you think their brains would be more useful working on something else?
"There's a big difference between should never and will never however. You may have to cope with malformed data, text streams from the WWW, archaic media, inputs from legacy screen scraping applications."
The original argument was about shell scripts. If you encounter malformed data, there's no guarantee cut's going to cut it (ha ha) either. Instead, you're going to run to perl for help, which is fine. It's just that under MSH, you automatically have the entire.NET framework behind you.
Besides, we're getting hung up over one little utility here. It's not exactly important if MSH 1.0 doesn't ship with the kitchen sink, as long as the interfaces it defines are powerful.
"Incidentally, I don't have a problem with Monad being more powerful than bash; Perl or Python would be a better basis for comparison."
Incidentally, I *do* have a problem with that. I would love to see the same features in standard unix shells, because I'm not going to switch to Windows just because of this, and I could seriously use MSH.
"MSH and BASH both have the same whizz-bang functionality available and MSH is lacking in some basic functionality."
RTFA.
"As for piping an HTML file directly to firefox you're wrong on two points. MSH can't pipe directly to IE either. There's no difference in the direct approach. The correct way is to echo > $filename && firefox $filename. Don't blame BASH for your ignorance."
You were the one who brought up the fact that MSH/IE can't do it, so of course I'm going to demonstrate the same method with bash/firefox. Your "correct" way even works with cmd.exe, btw, even though it's a bit more clunky there.
"I'm just not seeing anything in here but a horribly tortured object oriented syntax and a reexpression of MS' nightmarish implementation of the common "--help"."
The object oriented stuff provides extra features. You can still alias all the old stuff to the usual commands, and it apparently does so by default.
"Considering the decades of command line functionality which sh type shells have, apparently MSH is only dreaming of what BASH can do."
Please explain again how you think it's the shell's fault that other applications don't support its features. Oh and btw, `echo 'html-stuff' | firefox` results in a blank browser window.
You may have misunderstood my objection. I have no idea if Microsoft are offering something like cut. But that's missing the point, because your scenario should never occur under MSH.
Sure, you *can* still pipe raw text from one app to another, but it's not correct behavior for programs written for MSH, which makes it unnecessary for programs to deal with such presentation. AFAIK, all a script needs to do is pass the fields to the shell, and the user can then manipulate them in an arbitrary manner.
This both removes a lot of unnecessary code from applications and actually makes it harder to write programs that behave badly.
"Of course, if you didn't write the python script and don't have the time and/or skill to hack it, you might nd up using cut and the like to get the data in the format you need. The cool think about that is that it's possible. I don't know if the same can be said under MSH, but it seems unlikely"
Did you even open the article? MSH is significantly more powerful than cut. Bash can only dream of the features it has.
While their positive results can be reasonable, their methods are still downright embarrassing. When I first heard the show's description, I thought I'd love it, but what I actually mostly end up doing is bitching at how stupid they are.
Some examples:
-An experiment involved a certain ratio of air and methane. It took them several failed tries to figure out that they probably shouldn't measure it at the input nozzle.
-Another time, they needed a spear moving at velocity.forward = constant, acceleration.down = gravity to snag a hole in the ground. To make the hole easier to snag, they made it deeper, but not longer. They still managed to hit it eventually, but wtf.
"Cutting out Sony , Philips etc. with their nasty DRM and allowing free reign for his slightly less nasty DRM"
Well of course he's going to be pushing his own DRM format, but that doesn't mean we can't agree with him. Personally, I detest DRM in every form, but if one happens to believe that DRM is the only way studios will agree to online distribution, then Microsoft's method is certainly more consumer friendly.
Another thing to keep in mind is that the studios want to control how and where we watch our media, whereas Microsoft just wants to force us to use their software to do it. While both approaches are evil, I'm fairly sure Microsoft would still like to offer the consumer more features than the paranoid studios would. For example, if Microsoft was in control, I doubt we'd have ridiculous pricing schemes where you pay once for the TV broadcast, again for a DVD and again for a UMD. No, you'd just pay for that one file and be able to put it on any (MS) device.
I'm also delighted that someone with Gates' power would say that physical formats are a thing of the past. One of the main things I hate about DVD:s is how wasteful they are. We're filling up our landfills for no good reason at all, when networks and rewritable, high density hard drives could do the work for us. Even worse is the idea of disposable DVD rentals that pops up every year. The faster we can kill plastic discs the better.
"For example, you could transfer the whole balance to the phone in some encrypted manner, or you could have the phone check every minute whether the balance expired. You could keep its own true account, or you can model it as a phone with infinite airtime and a forced calling card."
That's not forced innovation. That's a forced ugly hack. Even worse, your idea of relying on the client is both dangerous and dependent on DRM.
You just shouldn't be able to patent solutions that don't require very expensive research. Period.
Yeah, I had big problems getting it too, even after I read the code. The bear-version makes much more sense, because it reveals that there are two elements to the puzzle.
The petal-version was especially annoying, because the "helpful" hint immediately made me think of permutations and combinations, leading me down a completely bullshit path. This wasn't helped by the fact that the description made it sound like a mathematical riddle, so I never even considered that control structures would be allowed.
I'd rather have my theoretical kids see any of the things you mentioned than let them play games that for example idolize gangster culture*. I hardly think someone is going to start enjoying triple penetration just because they saw it in a movie. And if they would enjoy it, it's none of my business as long as they use protection.
What kind of idiot are *you*, who thinks we should censor things that hurt no one but the prudes?
*Of course, if my kids had already demonstrated their intelligence and good manners, I'd let them do that too.
"What's wrong with the Eurocentric DD Month Year? It fits with how our brains work in relation to time. When someone is telling me a date I don't need to know that it's this year first, then this month, then some day."
When someone is telling you the date, they're not going to say YYYY dash MM dash DD. They'll simply tell you it's the DDth. They're just giving you a reference, not a timestamp.
"2005 20 10" gives me big concepts to digest first which might not even be necessary, while leaving the most important and specific details for last."
Your brain isn't supposed to digest the year first (unless it's important). It's supposed to jump to the third field automatically. You're just getting confused now because your brain expects the day to be in the first field. Your argument about the address format proves that you're just blindly sticking to what you know, given that it would be completely logical to write it as what you describe as "bass ackwards".
I've been using YYYY-MM-DD for everything since I heard of it, and nowadays any other date format causes me to hesitate. I'd even argue that I'm faster with it now, than I was with DD.MM.YY before, because having my computer display YYYY-MM-DD hh:mm in the corner puts everything in the same logical order.
"It really is sick when selling a game to a kid will result in a bigger fine than selling him porn or alcohol."
I agree that the fines are stupid in general, but if we are to fine people, selling violent games to kids should damn well be a more serious offense than selling them a magazine with some unclothed human beings. Don't fall for the "porn is evil"-propaganda.
So Danish politicians were smart enough to not do what the EU wanted, and Finnish politicians were too stupid to stand up for us. Fine. But that doesn't mean it's not due to the EU that this is happening.
"Economic powerhouse? Doesn't seem that way. Bigger governments encompassing bigger populations tend to hurt their economies in the long run with tariffs, regulations, crony favoritism and inflation."
Then why is the US so successful? I agree that bigger governments often (always?) make a mess of things, but the reason the EU will help growth is that it will open internal borders and standardize business practices/logistics across the union. If it works out...
Another problem with it is that, as humans, we always seem to standardize on whatever most people are already doing. If 5 people herding reindeer in Lapland have the best accounting methods, then the whole union should switch, not force them to change, damnit.
The EU was sold to us as an economic union. Then we were told we needed a constitution. That the EU would guard our basic rights.
Well, thanks a lot you bastards. Thanks a lot for the corruption and injustice you've brought with you. Seems like old Finnish legislation was doing a better job until your directives forced it to change. I weep for the future.
The EU as an economic powerhouse could be a great thing. The EU as a source of bad legislation is a recipe for disaster.
Thanks for the link. I was looking for that information earlier, but didn't have the time to look for it properly.
"On the other hand, the system is not \"too sensitive in general\", but rather is as I described it: it gets more sensitive with speed;"
I'll admit that my description of the problem was too soft, but yours is still misleading. In your previous post, you said "at low speeds, you need to crank the wheel all the way to turn full left. At 100 mph, touching the wheel will give you full left". This gives the wrong impression, as "full" deflection refers to maximum *allowed* deflection. In such a car, touching the wheel would indeed give you full left, but "full" would be limited to the angle needed to switch lanes.
On the A300-600, it seems like the same pedal positions would always correspond to the same rudder angle, so in that sense the system wasn't actually getting more sensitive, just losing resolution. The problem was that at 250 kts, the deflection would be capped at 9,3 degrees, causing the difference between no angle and maximum angle to be very small.
Airbus could have solved the problem by tying pedal positions to the maximum allowed angle instead of the maximum mechanical angle. Not doing so seems to have been a mistake, but it's less of a design flaw than what you describe.
Slashdot Mirror
I used to use a anti-xray film bag for shoplifting
I'm sure Stallman would be proud...
"I have lost of ogg music, and therefore am reluctant to buy even an ipod, so what about it not being put on this device? How hard can it be?"
./configure
make
make install
"In the end, it seems the only real winner after a hybrid purchase is the environment"
And that isn't enough?
"Now, if you go into any particular IRC room... even a "tech" room... the noise level dwarfs the signal..."
Sorry, but you just need to know where to go. And no, I'm not mentioning any channels on slashdot.
Somewhat offtopic, I recently discovered the song "Wake Me Up When September Ends" by a band called Green Day. It's not great or anything, but the title and some lyrics are strangely funny and appropriate. People who get the unintentional (?) joke may want to listen to it :-)
The others have already mentioned the boot CD + FTP, but I'd like to add that OpenBSD is even easier to install entirely over the network. There's no need to waste time and natural resources burning anything to a CD.
This is very easy to do, and all you need is DHCP and TFTP on another machine. The rest of the process is exactly the same. See PXEBOOT(8).
"That said, I may be able to help you out. Check out beanshell"
Thanks, I'll do that - it looks very interesting. MSH has one nasty advantage, though, and it relates to what you said here:
"But as someone else in this discussion pointed out, the power of pipes on *nix isn't the pipe so much as the wide array of small efficient pipefitting commands that have evolved over time."
MSH is going to become the standard Windows shell, and all utilities from now on will be written to support its advanced features, while any unix program will still have to target the lowest common denominator. Sure, someone can write an advanced version of ls for beanshell, but no one else is going to use it, it's going to be incompatible with everything else, and it's impossible to recreate every utility just for one shell.
"What can't you do, anyway? I've yet to find a problem I couldn't solve using Bash, Perl and/or Gawk. And maybe a command line SQL interpreter."
It's not that I can't get something done now, but some of the features make me think everything could be so much more elegant. I'm not sure how to argue the point, but to me piping objects instead of text streams seems incredibly more powerful.
"You're the one who brought up all this necessity for the object oriented equipment because, according to the current thread of arguments, most programmers just don't seem to be capable of post-processing of plaintext output from the standard set of command line tools. Oh the slavery of putting the brain to work."
Yeah, because *real* programmers would rather maintain unreadable parsers than just tell the environment to retrieve one labeled part of the output. Don't you think their brains would be more useful working on something else?
"There's a big difference between should never and will never however. You may have to cope with malformed data, text streams from the WWW, archaic media, inputs from legacy screen scraping applications."
The original argument was about shell scripts. If you encounter malformed data, there's no guarantee cut's going to cut it (ha ha) either. Instead, you're going to run to perl for help, which is fine. It's just that under MSH, you automatically have the entire .NET framework behind you.
Besides, we're getting hung up over one little utility here. It's not exactly important if MSH 1.0 doesn't ship with the kitchen sink, as long as the interfaces it defines are powerful.
"Incidentally, I don't have a problem with Monad being more powerful than bash; Perl or Python would be a better basis for comparison."
Incidentally, I *do* have a problem with that. I would love to see the same features in standard unix shells, because I'm not going to switch to Windows just because of this, and I could seriously use MSH.
"MSH and BASH both have the same whizz-bang functionality available and MSH is lacking in some basic functionality."
RTFA.
"As for piping an HTML file directly to firefox you're wrong on two points. MSH can't pipe directly to IE either. There's no difference in the direct approach. The correct way is to echo > $filename && firefox $filename. Don't blame BASH for your ignorance."
You were the one who brought up the fact that MSH/IE can't do it, so of course I'm going to demonstrate the same method with bash/firefox. Your "correct" way even works with cmd.exe, btw, even though it's a bit more clunky there.
"I'm just not seeing anything in here but a horribly tortured object oriented syntax and a reexpression of MS' nightmarish implementation of the common "--help"."
The object oriented stuff provides extra features. You can still alias all the old stuff to the usual commands, and it apparently does so by default.
"Considering the decades of command line functionality which sh type shells have, apparently MSH is only dreaming of what BASH can do."
Please explain again how you think it's the shell's fault that other applications don't support its features. Oh and btw, `echo 'html-stuff' | firefox` results in a blank browser window.
You may have misunderstood my objection. I have no idea if Microsoft are offering something like cut. But that's missing the point, because your scenario should never occur under MSH.
Sure, you *can* still pipe raw text from one app to another, but it's not correct behavior for programs written for MSH, which makes it unnecessary for programs to deal with such presentation. AFAIK, all a script needs to do is pass the fields to the shell, and the user can then manipulate them in an arbitrary manner.
This both removes a lot of unnecessary code from applications and actually makes it harder to write programs that behave badly.
I believe it was when you said "I don't know if the same can be said under MSH, but it seems unlikely".
"Of course, if you didn't write the python script and don't have the time and/or skill to hack it, you might nd up using cut and the like to get the data in the format you need. The cool think about that is that it's possible. I don't know if the same can be said under MSH, but it seems unlikely"
Did you even open the article? MSH is significantly more powerful than cut. Bash can only dream of the features it has.
While their positive results can be reasonable, their methods are still downright embarrassing. When I first heard the show's description, I thought I'd love it, but what I actually mostly end up doing is bitching at how stupid they are.
Some examples:
-An experiment involved a certain ratio of air and methane. It took them several failed tries to figure out that they probably shouldn't measure it at the input nozzle.
-Another time, they needed a spear moving at velocity.forward = constant, acceleration.down = gravity to snag a hole in the ground. To make the hole easier to snag, they made it deeper, but not longer. They still managed to hit it eventually, but wtf.
A bunch of clowns is what they are.
"Cutting out Sony , Philips etc. with their nasty DRM and allowing free reign for his slightly less nasty DRM"
Well of course he's going to be pushing his own DRM format, but that doesn't mean we can't agree with him. Personally, I detest DRM in every form, but if one happens to believe that DRM is the only way studios will agree to online distribution, then Microsoft's method is certainly more consumer friendly.
Another thing to keep in mind is that the studios want to control how and where we watch our media, whereas Microsoft just wants to force us to use their software to do it. While both approaches are evil, I'm fairly sure Microsoft would still like to offer the consumer more features than the paranoid studios would. For example, if Microsoft was in control, I doubt we'd have ridiculous pricing schemes where you pay once for the TV broadcast, again for a DVD and again for a UMD. No, you'd just pay for that one file and be able to put it on any (MS) device.
I'm also delighted that someone with Gates' power would say that physical formats are a thing of the past. One of the main things I hate about DVD:s is how wasteful they are. We're filling up our landfills for no good reason at all, when networks and rewritable, high density hard drives could do the work for us. Even worse is the idea of disposable DVD rentals that pops up every year. The faster we can kill plastic discs the better.
"For example, you could transfer the whole balance to the phone in some encrypted manner, or you could have the phone check every minute whether the balance expired. You could keep its own true account, or you can model it as a phone with infinite airtime and a forced calling card."
That's not forced innovation. That's a forced ugly hack. Even worse, your idea of relying on the client is both dangerous and dependent on DRM.
You just shouldn't be able to patent solutions that don't require very expensive research. Period.
Yeah, I had big problems getting it too, even after I read the code. The bear-version makes much more sense, because it reveals that there are two elements to the puzzle.
The petal-version was especially annoying, because the "helpful" hint immediately made me think of permutations and combinations, leading me down a completely bullshit path. This wasn't helped by the fact that the description made it sound like a mathematical riddle, so I never even considered that control structures would be allowed.
Maybe I'm just bitter I didn't solve it... :-)
I'd rather have my theoretical kids see any of the things you mentioned than let them play games that for example idolize gangster culture*. I hardly think someone is going to start enjoying triple penetration just because they saw it in a movie. And if they would enjoy it, it's none of my business as long as they use protection.
What kind of idiot are *you*, who thinks we should censor things that hurt no one but the prudes?
*Of course, if my kids had already demonstrated their intelligence and good manners, I'd let them do that too.
"What's wrong with the Eurocentric DD Month Year? It fits with how our brains work in relation to time. When someone is telling me a date I don't need to know that it's this year first, then this month, then some day."
When someone is telling you the date, they're not going to say YYYY dash MM dash DD. They'll simply tell you it's the DDth. They're just giving you a reference, not a timestamp.
"2005 20 10" gives me big concepts to digest first which might not even be necessary, while leaving the most important and specific details for last."
Your brain isn't supposed to digest the year first (unless it's important). It's supposed to jump to the third field automatically. You're just getting confused now because your brain expects the day to be in the first field. Your argument about the address format proves that you're just blindly sticking to what you know, given that it would be completely logical to write it as what you describe as "bass ackwards".
I've been using YYYY-MM-DD for everything since I heard of it, and nowadays any other date format causes me to hesitate. I'd even argue that I'm faster with it now, than I was with DD.MM.YY before, because having my computer display YYYY-MM-DD hh:mm in the corner puts everything in the same logical order.
"It really is sick when selling a game to a kid will result in a bigger fine than selling him porn or alcohol."
I agree that the fines are stupid in general, but if we are to fine people, selling violent games to kids should damn well be a more serious offense than selling them a magazine with some unclothed human beings. Don't fall for the "porn is evil"-propaganda.
So Danish politicians were smart enough to not do what the EU wanted, and Finnish politicians were too stupid to stand up for us. Fine. But that doesn't mean it's not due to the EU that this is happening.
"Economic powerhouse? Doesn't seem that way. Bigger governments encompassing bigger populations tend to hurt their economies in the long run with tariffs, regulations, crony favoritism and inflation."
Then why is the US so successful? I agree that bigger governments often (always?) make a mess of things, but the reason the EU will help growth is that it will open internal borders and standardize business practices/logistics across the union. If it works out...
Another problem with it is that, as humans, we always seem to standardize on whatever most people are already doing. If 5 people herding reindeer in Lapland have the best accounting methods, then the whole union should switch, not force them to change, damnit.
"This actually makes me glad to be an american... for the first time in a while..."
Do you remember where all this neo-copyright bullshit started? Do you remember what corporations lobbied the EU to pass this legislation?
More like you can't trust the EU.
The EU was sold to us as an economic union. Then we were told we needed a constitution. That the EU would guard our basic rights.
Well, thanks a lot you bastards. Thanks a lot for the corruption and injustice you've brought with you. Seems like old Finnish legislation was doing a better job until your directives forced it to change. I weep for the future.
The EU as an economic powerhouse could be a great thing. The EU as a source of bad legislation is a recipe for disaster.
Thanks for the link. I was looking for that information earlier, but didn't have the time to look for it properly.
"On the other hand, the system is not \"too sensitive in general\", but rather is as I described it: it gets more sensitive with speed;"
I'll admit that my description of the problem was too soft, but yours is still misleading. In your previous post, you said "at low speeds, you need to crank the wheel all the way to turn full left. At 100 mph, touching the wheel will give you full left". This gives the wrong impression, as "full" deflection refers to maximum *allowed* deflection. In such a car, touching the wheel would indeed give you full left, but "full" would be limited to the angle needed to switch lanes.
On the A300-600, it seems like the same pedal positions would always correspond to the same rudder angle, so in that sense the system wasn't actually getting more sensitive, just losing resolution. The problem was that at 250 kts, the deflection would be capped at 9,3 degrees, causing the difference between no angle and maximum angle to be very small.
Airbus could have solved the problem by tying pedal positions to the maximum allowed angle instead of the maximum mechanical angle. Not doing so seems to have been a mistake, but it's less of a design flaw than what you describe.