But if video content were commonly obtained online by most Americans, and with video content getting easier to make (edit video and sound with FREE software on your cheap computer), that means that radical political views can be easily disseminated to most America.
Ah, sure. Because
surely "unprotected" video will be allowed to be distributed forever (note that pirated video is always unprotected, and piracy has to be stopped at all means, never mind the collateral damage)
access to "protection" software to be able to distribute your own video will be easily and cheaply available (of course it has to be made completely certain that no pirate gets his hands on that technology, and of course the makers of the DRM want to get their investment back)
and finally, of course easily accessible videos would surey have a much bigger impact than the freely accessible web pages we already have today, right?
Indeed, originally it was S.u.S.E. (note the dots). It was an abbreviation for "Software- und System-Entwicklung" which is German for "software and system development".
Well, the very link you gave contaqins a list of all articles compared. If you don't know how to make a link from the name of a Wikipedia article, just use the Wikipedia search function.
Also, stealing laptops might become much more profitable if the laptop at the same time is the authentication to your bank. Ah, and if you sell an old computer, don't forget to tell that to every entity which uses that mechanism for authentication. Indeed, better you never sell your computer at all, but immediatly destroy it as soon as you don't have any use for it.
Depends on what you buy/sell. For example, profi killers sell the service of killing people for their clients. Now I hope you'll agree that both selling that service and buying it is evil.
You mean there are actually 450 trillion people in Europe? Or how else could this be explained as translation error? No matter from which convention you take the billion, it's too much in any case. The only difference is in the number of magnitudes you are off.
You all read that wrong. What it really means is that in the 1984th year of the existence of the EU, there will be 450 billion people living there. Ok, I'm not sure how they will fit onto the continent, but maybe until then genetic engeneering will have made humans about as small as mice (which would have several advantages, e.g. smaller people need less food and less living space, you could fall from greater height without being harmed, etc.; the disadvantage of a smaller brain doesn't count too much, because most people don't make use of theirs anyway).
Indeed, the current Web experience is lacking. Web sites should be able to set the screen resolution for the viewer, so that sites optimized for a certain resolution can be displayed optimally on every computer. It's really a shame that there's not yet an API to do it.:-)
I guess the problem is that options are usually presented as incoherent collection of individual desicions. Imagine the same would be true for skins. Then instead of having some coherent skins with nice names, you'd have lots of options of the sort "Put the close button ( ) left (*) right as ___-th button from the border", "image file for title bar: ________________", "image file for close button: _____________________" etc. Now, that's not what you usually get. Instead, you get a theme, which collects a set of decisions into a coherent whole, and possibly a few theme-dependent options. If you want more, you can write another theme.
Now, imagine you could do just the same for the functionality options. You could then have a "Windows theme" where program menus stay in the window, windows are focused on click and rise on focus, etc. Then you could have a "Mac theme" where program menus are displayed at the top of the screen, focus behaves just as on the Mac (whatever the behaviour there is), etc. If you want finer control, you can write your own behaviour theme or copy and modify an existing one.
That way, you'd get the best of both worlds: For the average user, the configuration options are minimal (mostly selecting a theme), but sufficient (if there are enough themes to cover most needs). The power user can tweak his UI by just writing his own theme (and as a bonus, can transfer his settings to other computers by just copying that theme), and if his theme is more generally useful, he can put it on the net for download or even submit it to the desktop project for adding to the list of standard themes.
BTW, though I confess that I like to reject window manager patches, I also spent a ton of time getting EWMH usable and supporting it in GNOME. The only purpose of EWMH is to make the window manager replaceable.
You may be noticing that I like the idea of "choice of two well-focused designs" better than "single choice of one nobody-hates-it design."
Of course, I just want to have my window manager work exactly the way I like it, and if there were a single window manager out there which worked exactly that way, I probably could live with it not being configurable. Now the point is that there simply is no WM which works the way I like it out of the box. Therefore I need configuration options (I don't care if I have a dialog box with point-and-click options or if I have to edit some configuration file; with the latter the possibility of advanced configuration may even be hidden from the average user who doesn't care about advanced features)
Ok, so maybe I should just write my own window manager as well, but I prefer to just tweak the settings of an existing one until it fits my needs - that's much less work:-)
Sawfish still exists, and still works quite well with GNOME (I'm currently sitting at a GNOME desktop with sawfish, and I also changed to it on my own computer at home). There are still some gripes with GNOME, esp. the "I won't let you put your windows above me" menus (which would not be a problem if the X screen size reported to programs would be reduced accordingly so that (non-GNOME) programs wouldn't think they could actually use that space). But there must be a way to avoid that: After all, the GNOME I'm just sitting on lets me overlap the menu just fine (I just don't know why - or rather, how to tell my "home GNOME" to let me do it as well). However those gripes are not enough to make me switch to KDE (BTW, does sawfish work with KDE? If not, then that would be a strong reason not to change.)
As for archival storage, why anticipate investing in an upgrade unless it's an order of magnitude greater than what you have now?
I bought my DVD burner before dual layer burners came out, therefore I'm limited to 4.7GB (and doubling the capacity indeed isn't enough to upgrade). Therefore 50GB are indeed an order of magnitude more than what I have now. Of course, if at that time an even larger capacity will be available at reasonable cost (or can be expected to get to that cost range qute soon), then I'll of course buy/wait for that. But then, future decisions have always their share of uncertainty (after all, maybe by that time all optical disk media are obsoleted by vastly improved USB sticks).
Slashdot Mirror
Well, given that the F in FF is duped, I'd choose that.
He actually meant that his cat's tongue is larger than his cheek. Which makes me wonder what sort of cat he has.
Who's the first to install Linux on Santa?
Ah, sure. Because
At some time, you'll get a pen which recognices if you write down copyrighted stuff and automatically stops the ink flow ...
Indeed, originally it was S.u.S.E. (note the dots). It was an abbreviation for "Software- und System-Entwicklung" which is German for "software and system development".
I'd say it is because they bought Cygnus, a company which had entirely specialized on gcc support.
There's also regulatory offense. And that's exactly what traffic violations usually are.
Well, the very link you gave contaqins a list of all articles compared. If you don't know how to make a link from the name of a Wikipedia article, just use the Wikipedia search function.
Well, just install a quantum computing chip to break the code. Oh, wait ...
Also, stealing laptops might become much more profitable if the laptop at the same time is the authentication to your bank.
Ah, and if you sell an old computer, don't forget to tell that to every entity which uses that mechanism for authentication. Indeed, better you never sell your computer at all, but immediatly destroy it as soon as you don't have any use for it.
Of course. After posting, it will transmit to every site you visit that you are an anonymous coward. :-)
Depends on what you buy/sell. For example, profi killers sell the service of killing people for their clients. Now I hope you'll agree that both selling that service and buying it is evil.
And of course a three-orders-of-magnitude typo in another slashdot story of today ... :-)
Double-entry bookkeeping, of course.
6600000000000 = 6.6 trillion (US) = 6.6 billion (European)
:-)
6600000000 = 6.6 billion (US) = 6.6 milliard (European)
Maybe we should switch to scientific terms: The world population is 6.6 gigapeople.
You mean there are actually 450 trillion people in Europe? Or how else could this be explained as translation error?
No matter from which convention you take the billion, it's too much in any case. The only difference is in the number of magnitudes you are off.
You all read that wrong. What it really means is that in the 1984th year of the existence of the EU, there will be 450 billion people living there. Ok, I'm not sure how they will fit onto the continent, but maybe until then genetic engeneering will have made humans about as small as mice (which would have several advantages, e.g. smaller people need less food and less living space, you could fall from greater height without being harmed, etc.; the disadvantage of a smaller brain doesn't count too much, because most people don't make use of theirs anyway).
Indeed, the current Web experience is lacking. Web sites should be able to set the screen resolution for the viewer, so that sites optimized for a certain resolution can be displayed optimally on every computer. It's really a shame that there's not yet an API to do it. :-)
I guess the problem is that options are usually presented as incoherent collection of individual desicions. Imagine the same would be true for skins. Then instead of having some coherent skins with nice names, you'd have lots of options of the sort "Put the close button ( ) left (*) right as ___-th button from the border", "image file for title bar: ________________", "image file for close button: _____________________" etc. Now, that's not what you usually get. Instead, you get a theme, which collects a set of decisions into a coherent whole, and possibly a few theme-dependent options. If you want more, you can write another theme.
Now, imagine you could do just the same for the functionality options. You could then have a "Windows theme" where program menus stay in the window, windows are focused on click and rise on focus, etc. Then you could have a "Mac theme" where program menus are displayed at the top of the screen, focus behaves just as on the Mac (whatever the behaviour there is), etc. If you want finer control, you can write your own behaviour theme or copy and modify an existing one.
That way, you'd get the best of both worlds: For the average user, the configuration options are minimal (mostly selecting a theme), but sufficient (if there are enough themes to cover most needs). The power user can tweak his UI by just writing his own theme (and as a bonus, can transfer his settings to other computers by just copying that theme), and if his theme is more generally useful, he can put it on the net for download or even submit it to the desktop project for adding to the list of standard themes.
Of course, I just want to have my window manager work exactly the way I like it, and if there were a single window manager out there which worked exactly that way, I probably could live with it not being configurable. Now the point is that there simply is no WM which works the way I like it out of the box. Therefore I need configuration options (I don't care if I have a dialog box with point-and-click options or if I have to edit some configuration file; with the latter the possibility of advanced configuration may even be hidden from the average user who doesn't care about advanced features)
Ok, so maybe I should just write my own window manager as well, but I prefer to just tweak the settings of an existing one until it fits my needs - that's much less work
No. Toilet paper is a waste. Use the three sea shells instead.
Sawfish still exists, and still works quite well with GNOME (I'm currently sitting at a GNOME desktop with sawfish, and I also changed to it on my own computer at home).
There are still some gripes with GNOME, esp. the "I won't let you put your windows above me" menus (which would not be a problem if the X screen size reported to programs would be reduced accordingly so that (non-GNOME) programs wouldn't think they could actually use that space). But there must be a way to avoid that: After all, the GNOME I'm just sitting on lets me overlap the menu just fine (I just don't know why - or rather, how to tell my "home GNOME" to let me do it as well). However those gripes are not enough to make me switch to KDE (BTW, does sawfish work with KDE? If not, then that would be a strong reason not to change.)
I bought my DVD burner before dual layer burners came out, therefore I'm limited to 4.7GB (and doubling the capacity indeed isn't enough to upgrade). Therefore 50GB are indeed an order of magnitude more than what I have now.
Of course, if at that time an even larger capacity will be available at reasonable cost (or can be expected to get to that cost range qute soon), then I'll of course buy/wait for that. But then, future decisions have always their share of uncertainty (after all, maybe by that time all optical disk media are obsoleted by vastly improved USB sticks).
Well, if you consider Wikipedia as hard enough, look here and here.
The square thing you've seen was probably a BRD in a caddie. Of course it's also possible that HD-DVD versions with caddie exist(ed).