This is exactly my point. The irresponsibility of epic proportions is on the side of the users who didn't realise that the design of the system invites them to be fucked over by a data loss incident. They have no one to blame but themselves.
HOW THE HELL DO THE CUSTOMERS NOT TAKE BACKUPS THEMSELVES
If the data is important, then the only way to make sure it doesn't get lost is to take some responsibility for your actions and do back-ups yourself. If your service provider does not let you then don't use the service, it's that simple.
I bought Vista for the PC I built in April. I guess I just missed out on the 'free Windows 7 upgrade' window. I don't care because as far as I can tell, Windows 7 is identical to Vista with the exception that they crippled UAC, thus making it less secure!
$ size h text data bss dec hex filename 2030 608 296 2934 b76 h
That's with GCC 4.3.3, no optimization, stripping the executable after compiling it.
The problem with mingw is that it doesn't yet support linking to libstdc++ dynamically. Even if you manage to build an executable that appears to link to it dynamically, it still includes a bunch of code statically anyway. Hence the apparent bloat in your executable.
The definition of 'improper' and 'proper' really do depend on your exact requirements. On a PC, who cares if you are linking to one more library that is already on the target system? If you are developing code to run on a GBA then yes, you probably don't want the overhead you mention. But even the DS? That has 4 MB of RAM. That is a lot! If using features from libstdc++ means that you finish your program faster, then you have more time to debug it, and add extra features, etc.
That's very strange. I would guess that either the OpenGL implementation is buggy or configured incorrectly, or VLC is doing some toolkit-specific thing to disable it.
AFAIK the only way to sync screen updates to vertical blanks in X11 is by using OpenGL, what a pain.:(
If China is taking moral cues from how Imperial powers acted in the 19th century and before then yes, we have a problem.
Interestingly, no one seems to know much about how the slave trade was ended, in large part due to the efforts of Britain after we decided to abolish it.
Just curious... did you contact the shop you bought it from, and tell them that it didn't work? And that there are (probably) consumer protection laws that protect you from people who sell defective products that don't work?
Did you contact Bioware themselves for tech support?
Depends which games you play. These days it is more common to find Starforce, SecuROM or some other incredibly invasive and destabilising DRM system to be a requirement to play the game that I already paid for. Not to mention onerous online activation, mandatory period reactivation, and even sometimes, a limited number of installations, ever before the game I bought self-destructs!
It still may be a valid argument. Going to the Pirate Bay and downloading the full game may well be easier than tracking down a copy of the demo on the publisher's web site (we all know how terrible they can be) or, shudder, Fileplanet or similar... having to register to download it... memorising Yet Another Password... then being stuck in a queue before the download can begin... and then the download proceeding at a pathetic 12 KiB/sec. Not to mention that many demos seem to embed Starforce or other invasive DRM software these days, for god knows what reason other than publisher idiocy.
Most people don't type in "https://mybank.com". They just type mybank.com -- or google search for mybank and hit "I'm feeling lucky", neither or which will use encryption.
Web browsers need to use https by default, and need to stop supporting unencrypted connections entirely.
Boot up Linux and all the stuff on your NTFS partition is read-only. The situation gets even worse when you boot Windows because that can't even see the stuff on your Linux partition. It's like having two seperate computers and no easy way to share data between them.
Not true; there are plenty of ways to read your Linux files from within Windows. For example: http://ext2fsd.sourceforge.net/.
I'll take TUN/TAP over VMware's clusterfuck of an installation script any day.
Many of VirtualBox's error messages could be improved, but they are better than VMware's random freezing or empty dialog boxes.
I think you're a bit crazy to run a 64 bit kernel and 32 bit user space... it doesn't really matter if VirtualBox does or does not support this... Linux itself doesn't!
On that topic - I'm not sure whether *any* binaries built of VirtualBox could legally be distributed under the GPL, anyhow - I'm worried about the fact that it depends on the DirectX SDK and Windows Driver Kit - would the terms of either of those 'poison' the binaries?
Depends whether their copyright holders (Microsoft) considered that binaries linked against them comprise a derivative work. Best check their respective licenses.
You should also consider whether the works you distribute use any of Sun's trademarks or patents; if so you will need a license to use them (or you will need to remove the offending trademarks and code implementing the patents from your compiled version).
I should, I suppose, mention that it's possible that since the version of the source that I downloaded, the VBox developers may have fixed the compile issue, but the whole thing just reeks of trying to appear to be GPL, while making it practically impossible for most users (on Windows, at least) to get it working from source, starting with the fact that you can't compile it on Windows without Visual C++, and continuing on to the un-compilability of the source code version which was released at the time I tried to build the binaries ( about a month ago ).
I'm curious to know: were you trying a released version, or an SVN checkout? And did you file a bug report? That's a better way to bring your problem to the attention of the developers than posting on a random forum.
Besides, developing software on Windows will always be an unpleasant and frustrating experience. Those who undertake it deserve at least my sympathy, and if they want to charge for the result then I don't have a problem with it.
If someone else comes along and decides that Sun are charging too much, they can always improve the build process (of course, Sun might not accept the patches back... we know they are, TBH, terrible with regards to actually managing the interaction between non-Sun contributors and Sun developers in their open source projects).
At the end of the day, I guess I don't really care, because I don't use Windows. All I have to do to get it running is install the virtualbox-ose package. If I want to build it myself, I have only to run dpkg-buildpackage. Maybe some day Microsoft will catch up.
Slashdot Mirror
This is exactly my point. The irresponsibility of epic proportions is on the side of the users who didn't realise that the design of the system invites them to be fucked over by a data loss incident. They have no one to blame but themselves.
HOW THE HELL DO THE CUSTOMERS NOT TAKE BACKUPS THEMSELVES
If the data is important, then the only way to make sure it doesn't get lost is to take some responsibility for your actions and do back-ups yourself. If your service provider does not let you then don't use the service, it's that simple.
s/astronaunt/astronomer/
Unless you were making a clever joke that I didn't spot... :)
> Swine flu is probably several times more deadlier than a normal flu.
Cite please. "Swine flue" is no more deadly than other influenzas. It is just more contagious.
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/w/index.php?title=2009_flu_pandemic&oldid=312830682#Symptoms_and_severity
I'm more worried about H1Z1. :)
I bought Vista for the PC I built in April. I guess I just missed out on the 'free Windows 7 upgrade' window. I don't care because as far as I can tell, Windows 7 is identical to Vista with the exception that they crippled UAC, thus making it less secure!
There is no such right in the UK.
"You do not have to say anything, but it may harm your defence if you do not mention, when questioned, something which you later rely on in court."
$ /usr/share/misc/config.guess
x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
$ cat h.cpp
#include <iostream>
int main () {
std::cout << "hello, world\n";
}
$ size h
text data bss dec hex filename
2030 608 296 2934 b76 h
That's with GCC 4.3.3, no optimization, stripping the executable after compiling it.
The problem with mingw is that it doesn't yet support linking to libstdc++ dynamically. Even if you manage to build an executable that appears to link to it dynamically, it still includes a bunch of code statically anyway. Hence the apparent bloat in your executable.
The definition of 'improper' and 'proper' really do depend on your exact requirements. On a PC, who cares if you are linking to one more library that is already on the target system? If you are developing code to run on a GBA then yes, you probably don't want the overhead you mention. But even the DS? That has 4 MB of RAM. That is a lot! If using features from libstdc++ means that you finish your program faster, then you have more time to debug it, and add extra features, etc.
That's very strange. I would guess that either the OpenGL implementation is buggy or configured incorrectly, or VLC is doing some toolkit-specific thing to disable it.
AFAIK the only way to sync screen updates to vertical blanks in X11 is by using OpenGL, what a pain. :(
Try using the OpenGL output driver, and make sure 'wait for vertical blank' (vsync) or a similarly-worded option is enabled.
That's nothing compared to what Matthew Sobel pulled off...
How can you pay for it anonymously?
I wonder why they don't just ship the checksums of the files with the server, rather than the entire file itself.
I do hope you remember to follow that up with an xhost -mylaptopname afterwards.
Really, you shouldn't do this at all, since authentication based on hostname lookups is insecure.
Browsers should treat self signed certs as 'unsigned with the added bonus that communications can't be eavesdropped'
Except that that would not be correct!
It seems fairly straightforward to invoice them for your resonable costs in phoning them up. If they don't pay, take them to small claims.
Out of interest, how can you detect absorption?
If China is taking moral cues from how Imperial powers acted in the 19th century and before then yes, we have a problem.
Interestingly, no one seems to know much about how the slave trade was ended, in large part due to the efforts of Britain after we decided to abolish it.
Just curious... did you contact the shop you bought it from, and tell them that it didn't work? And that there are (probably) consumer protection laws that protect you from people who sell defective products that don't work?
Did you contact Bioware themselves for tech support?
Depends which games you play. These days it is more common to find Starforce, SecuROM or some other incredibly invasive and destabilising DRM system to be a requirement to play the game that I already paid for. Not to mention onerous online activation, mandatory period reactivation, and even sometimes, a limited number of installations, ever before the game I bought self-destructs!
It still may be a valid argument. Going to the Pirate Bay and downloading the full game may well be easier than tracking down a copy of the demo on the publisher's web site (we all know how terrible they can be) or, shudder, Fileplanet or similar... having to register to download it... memorising Yet Another Password... then being stuck in a queue before the download can begin... and then the download proceeding at a pathetic 12 KiB/sec. Not to mention that many demos seem to embed Starforce or other invasive DRM software these days, for god knows what reason other than publisher idiocy.
$ apt-cache -n search power dns | wc -l
0
Most people don't type in "https://mybank.com". They just type mybank.com -- or google search for mybank and hit "I'm feeling lucky", neither or which will use encryption.
Web browsers need to use https by default, and need to stop supporting unencrypted connections entirely.
Boot up Linux and all the stuff on your NTFS partition is read-only. The situation gets even worse when you boot Windows because that can't even see the stuff on your Linux partition. It's like having two seperate computers and no easy way to share data between them.
Not true; there are plenty of ways to read your Linux files from within Windows. For example: http://ext2fsd.sourceforge.net/.
I'll take TUN/TAP over VMware's clusterfuck of an installation script any day.
Many of VirtualBox's error messages could be improved, but they are better than VMware's random freezing or empty dialog boxes.
I think you're a bit crazy to run a 64 bit kernel and 32 bit user space... it doesn't really matter if VirtualBox does or does not support this... Linux itself doesn't!
On that topic - I'm not sure whether *any* binaries built of VirtualBox could legally be distributed under the GPL, anyhow - I'm worried about the fact that it depends on the DirectX SDK and Windows Driver Kit - would the terms of either of those 'poison' the binaries?
Depends whether their copyright holders (Microsoft) considered that binaries linked against them comprise a derivative work. Best check their respective licenses.
You should also consider whether the works you distribute use any of Sun's trademarks or patents; if so you will need a license to use them (or you will need to remove the offending trademarks and code implementing the patents from your compiled version).
I should, I suppose, mention that it's possible that since the version of the source that I downloaded, the VBox developers may have fixed the compile issue, but the whole thing just reeks of trying to appear to be GPL, while making it practically impossible for most users (on Windows, at least) to get it working from source, starting with the fact that you can't compile it on Windows without Visual C++, and continuing on to the un-compilability of the source code version which was released at the time I tried to build the binaries ( about a month ago ).
I'm curious to know: were you trying a released version, or an SVN checkout? And did you file a bug report? That's a better way to bring your problem to the attention of the developers than posting on a random forum.
Besides, developing software on Windows will always be an unpleasant and frustrating experience. Those who undertake it deserve at least my sympathy, and if they want to charge for the result then I don't have a problem with it.
If someone else comes along and decides that Sun are charging too much, they can always improve the build process (of course, Sun might not accept the patches back... we know they are, TBH, terrible with regards to actually managing the interaction between non-Sun contributors and Sun developers in their open source projects).
At the end of the day, I guess I don't really care, because I don't use Windows. All I have to do to get it running is install the virtualbox-ose package. If I want to build it myself, I have only to run dpkg-buildpackage. Maybe some day Microsoft will catch up.