Responding to your point 1: If I go to Walmart and buy a toaster and then get home and find that it only toasts one side of the bread, I can return it. Or if I find that it doesn't fit on my counter, I can return it. If I decide I don't like the color, I can return it. And that's for a $7 toaster (don't buy the $7 toaster, by the way--you get what you pay for, and, no, sadly, even a simple toaster can still be botched up in the 21st century). Now if I buy a $50-60 computer game and get home and find out that it has glaring bugs that may or may not be fixed by the developer if and when they feel like it, I can't return it, because it's opened software. Or if it doesn't fit on my hard disk, or run on my video card, or the min sysreqs are a joke, I can't return it, because it's opened software. Do you sense a disparity here? All the cards (and lawyers) are stacked in their favor.
Yeah, I can vote with my wallet--and I do. But the point remains. True piracy is stuff like selling bootleg DVDs. Even that is a misuse of the word--it's actually counterfeiting.
And while I do not think its necessarily justified to download a game and play the whole thing without compensating those who invested in making it (leaving aside issues of abandonware), I do think copyright is fundamentally an evil concept, used only to enforce and fuel greed. I'm not sure where the line of justification for civil disobedience is--I don't think it's a fine line, not black and white, etc--but it may be just as wrong to say that it's never justified as to say that it's always justified.
I disagree. Google has had great services, like regular web search and Gmail. It's also had less-popular great services, like Reader and News. But lately they have begun to ruin those very services that have been great.
Also, Google's diversity and experiments have never been a weakness! It's one of the things that has made Google better and stronger than other companies. Experiments, research, and development pave the way for future greatness!
I shudder at the idea of Google trying to become like Apple! As if Larry Page needs to take advice from Steve Jobs! Apple's been trying to catch up with Google! I bet Jobs would have loved for Google to restrain itself and act more like Apple--it would have made it easier for Apple to compete.
I don't know if it's bean-counting or what, but Google is cutting off branches before they have a chance to bear fruit, and the Internet at large is worse off for it. Sheesh, there are only so many Googlers that can work on one thing at a time, anyway. Google just needs to stop trying to fix what ain't broke--just keep doing what's made it successful, only making minor adjustments as it goes.
It's like that episode of TNG, "Conspiracy". The leadership at Google has been infiltrated by aliens (or bean counters), and they're suddenly making decisions based on very different criteria. Google's making money hand-over-fist--they don't need to cut projects to pad the bottom line. But that's exactly what they're doing now--that and ruining the UIs of their best services. Google's eventual decline has begun sooner than expected. They're abandoning the formula that's gotten them where they are. Time to prep the lifeboats and prepare our own ships.
Um...because it's incomplete? I suppose the Clementine devs haven't ported over every feature. Those seem like minor features to me. It's still an excellent port. They are very responsive too; feel free to check their bug tracker and file a request.
KDE 4 has made many mistakes. But setting the wallpaper?
Right-click desktop>Desktop Settings. "Wallpaper" is on the screen that immediately shows up.
And, um...'find . | xargs grep filename"? How about 'find . -name "filename"'? "man find"? Seems like you might like to do things the hard way...
Sounds like you're better off having that friend of a friend not speaking to you. Sounds like they have anger issues, overreact to things, and are ungrateful.
KDE 4 didn't copy Vista any more than KDE 3 copied Windows 95--in other words, sure, there are similarities, but it's not just a clone.
Um, isn't the opposite true? Being reclined at 35 degrees (or 45 in the F-16) should make it much easier because you're already tilted back. A large part of the time in a dogfight, if not the majority of the time, the pilot will have his vertical axis aligned with the enemy aircraft and will be looking straight "up" relative to his aircraft.
Just try it for yourself: Sit up straight in your chair and try to look overhead and behind you, and to the sides and behind you, to your 5 and 7 o'clock, high and low. Then do the same thing while leaning backwards: it's much easier. Since the pilot can't see through his own aircraft, leaning back puts the range of motion of his head more in line with his actual field of view.
What you've just suggested is the same error clueless bureaucrats make about technology, except in reverse; the other side of the same coin.
PHBs who have no idea how computers or networks work say to organize or administrate them in a way that makes sense for organizing tangible items with physical problems, but utterly fails when applied to computers.
You have suggested organizing the branches of the military according to the way a computer network should be organized. Worse, you've suggested this not only regarding the branches' computer networks, but also regarding military operations.
Not only do you ignore the inter-service cooperation that already exists, but you ignore the pointless extra division that your idea would entail, like having AF pilots flying aircraft off carriers or flying Blackhawks full of Army troops. In both cases, the AF pilots would be working exclusively with members of the other branch, so what would the point be of having them under a different CoC? They'd end up assigned to TDY under another branch...in which case they might as well be in that branch in the first place. It really doesn't help unit cohesion to have artificial divisions between, e.g. the chopper pilots and the troops they carry around and support.
Are you even aware that the Marines are under the Department of the Navy? Sheesh.
That's not the point. The point is it's greedy of Intel to do such a thing, and greed is evil.
Also, it's almost like the political system: basically two parties, with nearly no chance for anyone else to compete. (Not talking about other markets, like mobile devices.) By doing this, Intel would be exploiting its monopolistic market position at the expense of consumers.
I'm not saying the government should regulate Intel; I'm saying Intel ought to be ashamed for doing such a thing.
Not everything that's wrong should be illegal, but everything that's wrong should not be done.
"them offering a tiered CPU upgrade path you pay for in the future wouldn't be a crazy or evil idea. It wouldn't be something something aimed at the high end computer user, this is something the average joe could take advantage of to get some extra speed out of their computer without having to replace it or take it in and spend more money to buy a whole new CPU."
Are you stupid, or are you an Intel lackey?
Your average joe could have had that extra CPU speed in the first place if Intel hadn't artificially crippled the CPU. It didn't cost Intel any extra money to make the CPU go faster.
This hypothetical CPU in question already has the ability to run at 3 GHz, but is artificially restricted from doing so in order to create a tiered market in order to suck more money from consumers in order to make the manufacturer richer. The extra money charged to enable the 3 GHz speed is nothing but gravy, because the CPU costs the same to manufacture whether the 3 GHz speed is enabled or not. No--in fact, it costs more to manufacture with the "security features". If they didn't spend the money designing and producing extra silicon to artificially shaft--sorry, restrict--their customers, they'd have more profit.
You can't compare two separate things--your computer, and Photoshop--to the innate physical properties of a CPU, artificially hampered for no good reason. Doing so is either foolish or disingenuous.
Which is it?
If it's foolish ignorance, educate yourself using The Internet.
If it's the latter, you support greed and are evil. Reasoning with evil is itself foolish.
No, he didn't prove that MS-haters are mindless--he simply proved that he, himself, is rude.
There may be good people who work for Microsoft, but Microsoft, as a whole, is nothing less than evil, and has been for a long time--probably forever. Apple's not much better, nor is Amazon. I'm afraid the list goes on and on.
Microsoft has less of a dominant position in some markets than it used to have--I guess that's why fewer people seem to hate it. It's no less evil, though. It seems to me that anyone who doesn't admit Microsoft's evilness either has his head in the sand of denial, or is selfish and greedy, supporting MS because it helps his bottom line. Or, I suppose he could be ignorant and doesn't care.
Really, what justification is there for supporting Microsoft, other than scratching each others' backs?
I truly hope you're right. But I doubt it will happen in our lifetime. And it might never happen. It seems like, in order for it to happen, corporate power over government would have to decrease, but it seems like it's only increasing, all over the world.
It's not Apple's product after it's sold to a customer.
There is a fundamental confusion caused by the fact that Apple is providing the app store service for free to purchasers of the iPhone, who have paid a one-time fee (carrier subsidies are a different matter). Apple is asserting control over the service as if people were subscribing to it for a monthly fee.
Oh, wait, are their customers the consumers who purchase their products, or the developers who write software for their products? Or are they the media companies who sell music and movies on iTunes?
Apple wants all of them to be its customers--it wants to make money from all of them for everything that happens.
It's got to stop somewhere--and it ought to be at the first-sale doctrine. But the practical solution is to support Android instead. On the other hand, if Apple is allowed to get away with this forever, and they keep growing, it may become the accepted norm--or is it already?
What is it with these stupid Arkansas jokes? Arkansas is just as developed and civilized as anywhere else in the USA. One can find low-class, uneducated people in every state and every major city in the country, even the world. By making such inane comments, you're showing your ignorance or prejudice. Grow up.
Slashdot Mirror
Responding to your point 1: If I go to Walmart and buy a toaster and then get home and find that it only toasts one side of the bread, I can return it. Or if I find that it doesn't fit on my counter, I can return it. If I decide I don't like the color, I can return it. And that's for a $7 toaster (don't buy the $7 toaster, by the way--you get what you pay for, and, no, sadly, even a simple toaster can still be botched up in the 21st century). Now if I buy a $50-60 computer game and get home and find out that it has glaring bugs that may or may not be fixed by the developer if and when they feel like it, I can't return it, because it's opened software. Or if it doesn't fit on my hard disk, or run on my video card, or the min sysreqs are a joke, I can't return it, because it's opened software. Do you sense a disparity here? All the cards (and lawyers) are stacked in their favor.
Yeah, I can vote with my wallet--and I do. But the point remains. True piracy is stuff like selling bootleg DVDs. Even that is a misuse of the word--it's actually counterfeiting.
And while I do not think its necessarily justified to download a game and play the whole thing without compensating those who invested in making it (leaving aside issues of abandonware), I do think copyright is fundamentally an evil concept, used only to enforce and fuel greed. I'm not sure where the line of justification for civil disobedience is--I don't think it's a fine line, not black and white, etc--but it may be just as wrong to say that it's never justified as to say that it's always justified.
I disagree. Google has had great services, like regular web search and Gmail. It's also had less-popular great services, like Reader and News. But lately they have begun to ruin those very services that have been great.
Also, Google's diversity and experiments have never been a weakness! It's one of the things that has made Google better and stronger than other companies. Experiments, research, and development pave the way for future greatness!
I shudder at the idea of Google trying to become like Apple! As if Larry Page needs to take advice from Steve Jobs! Apple's been trying to catch up with Google! I bet Jobs would have loved for Google to restrain itself and act more like Apple--it would have made it easier for Apple to compete.
I don't know if it's bean-counting or what, but Google is cutting off branches before they have a chance to bear fruit, and the Internet at large is worse off for it. Sheesh, there are only so many Googlers that can work on one thing at a time, anyway. Google just needs to stop trying to fix what ain't broke--just keep doing what's made it successful, only making minor adjustments as it goes.
It's like that episode of TNG, "Conspiracy". The leadership at Google has been infiltrated by aliens (or bean counters), and they're suddenly making decisions based on very different criteria. Google's making money hand-over-fist--they don't need to cut projects to pad the bottom line. But that's exactly what they're doing now--that and ruining the UIs of their best services. Google's eventual decline has begun sooner than expected. They're abandoning the formula that's gotten them where they are. Time to prep the lifeboats and prepare our own ships.
Um...because it's incomplete? I suppose the Clementine devs haven't ported over every feature. Those seem like minor features to me. It's still an excellent port. They are very responsive too; feel free to check their bug tracker and file a request.
That strongly suggests a problem with the distro's build of KDE, not a problem with KDE itself. Which distro did you use?
It's a port. It's great.
KDE 4 has made many mistakes. But setting the wallpaper?
Right-click desktop>Desktop Settings. "Wallpaper" is on the screen that immediately shows up.
And, um...'find . | xargs grep filename"? How about 'find . -name "filename"'? "man find"? Seems like you might like to do things the hard way...
Sounds like you're better off having that friend of a friend not speaking to you. Sounds like they have anger issues, overreact to things, and are ungrateful.
KDE 4 didn't copy Vista any more than KDE 3 copied Windows 95--in other words, sure, there are similarities, but it's not just a clone.
Cool, thanks for that. So what aircraft did you fly and for what service?
You're right, however I'm sure it helps the pilot both to pull high Gs and to look behind his aircraft in a dogfight.
Um, isn't the opposite true? Being reclined at 35 degrees (or 45 in the F-16) should make it much easier because you're already tilted back. A large part of the time in a dogfight, if not the majority of the time, the pilot will have his vertical axis aligned with the enemy aircraft and will be looking straight "up" relative to his aircraft.
Just try it for yourself: Sit up straight in your chair and try to look overhead and behind you, and to the sides and behind you, to your 5 and 7 o'clock, high and low. Then do the same thing while leaning backwards: it's much easier. Since the pilot can't see through his own aircraft, leaning back puts the range of motion of his head more in line with his actual field of view.
(I was half-joking, by the way. Did you detect the irony?)
But seriously, stereotypes often say more about those who subscribe to them than those whom they're about.
Generalizations are always stupid.
What you've just suggested is the same error clueless bureaucrats make about technology, except in reverse; the other side of the same coin.
PHBs who have no idea how computers or networks work say to organize or administrate them in a way that makes sense for organizing tangible items with physical problems, but utterly fails when applied to computers.
You have suggested organizing the branches of the military according to the way a computer network should be organized. Worse, you've suggested this not only regarding the branches' computer networks, but also regarding military operations.
Not only do you ignore the inter-service cooperation that already exists, but you ignore the pointless extra division that your idea would entail, like having AF pilots flying aircraft off carriers or flying Blackhawks full of Army troops. In both cases, the AF pilots would be working exclusively with members of the other branch, so what would the point be of having them under a different CoC? They'd end up assigned to TDY under another branch...in which case they might as well be in that branch in the first place. It really doesn't help unit cohesion to have artificial divisions between, e.g. the chopper pilots and the troops they carry around and support.
Are you even aware that the Marines are under the Department of the Navy? Sheesh.
Mono apps are S-L-O-W and bloated. What's wrong with C? It's served Linux well for many years.
So you support Intel's greed, then.
That's not the point. The point is it's greedy of Intel to do such a thing, and greed is evil.
Also, it's almost like the political system: basically two parties, with nearly no chance for anyone else to compete. (Not talking about other markets, like mobile devices.) By doing this, Intel would be exploiting its monopolistic market position at the expense of consumers.
I'm not saying the government should regulate Intel; I'm saying Intel ought to be ashamed for doing such a thing.
Not everything that's wrong should be illegal, but everything that's wrong should not be done.
"them offering a tiered CPU upgrade path you pay for in the future wouldn't be a crazy or evil idea. It wouldn't be something something aimed at the high end computer user, this is something the average joe could take advantage of to get some extra speed out of their computer without having to replace it or take it in and spend more money to buy a whole new CPU."
Are you stupid, or are you an Intel lackey?
Your average joe could have had that extra CPU speed in the first place if Intel hadn't artificially crippled the CPU. It didn't cost Intel any extra money to make the CPU go faster.
It's pure greed, which is pure evil.
Are you a troll or just stupid?
This hypothetical CPU in question already has the ability to run at 3 GHz, but is artificially restricted from doing so in order to create a tiered market in order to suck more money from consumers in order to make the manufacturer richer. The extra money charged to enable the 3 GHz speed is nothing but gravy, because the CPU costs the same to manufacture whether the 3 GHz speed is enabled or not. No--in fact, it costs more to manufacture with the "security features". If they didn't spend the money designing and producing extra silicon to artificially shaft--sorry, restrict--their customers, they'd have more profit.
You can't compare two separate things--your computer, and Photoshop--to the innate physical properties of a CPU, artificially hampered for no good reason. Doing so is either foolish or disingenuous.
Which is it?
If it's foolish ignorance, educate yourself using The Internet.
If it's the latter, you support greed and are evil. Reasoning with evil is itself foolish.
"This is accomplished by no longer caching previous pages (so if you go back, you'll have to reload from scratch.)"
Um...did they remove the caching completely? If so, that's not progress. It was a great step forward when they added it.
No, he didn't prove that MS-haters are mindless--he simply proved that he, himself, is rude.
There may be good people who work for Microsoft, but Microsoft, as a whole, is nothing less than evil, and has been for a long time--probably forever. Apple's not much better, nor is Amazon. I'm afraid the list goes on and on.
Microsoft has less of a dominant position in some markets than it used to have--I guess that's why fewer people seem to hate it. It's no less evil, though. It seems to me that anyone who doesn't admit Microsoft's evilness either has his head in the sand of denial, or is selfish and greedy, supporting MS because it helps his bottom line. Or, I suppose he could be ignorant and doesn't care.
Really, what justification is there for supporting Microsoft, other than scratching each others' backs?
That's an interesting idea. But what if rich executives and board members of corporations made the contributions personally?
Sure makes you think, doesn't it.
I truly hope you're right. But I doubt it will happen in our lifetime. And it might never happen. It seems like, in order for it to happen, corporate power over government would have to decrease, but it seems like it's only increasing, all over the world.
It's not Apple's product after it's sold to a customer.
There is a fundamental confusion caused by the fact that Apple is providing the app store service for free to purchasers of the iPhone, who have paid a one-time fee (carrier subsidies are a different matter). Apple is asserting control over the service as if people were subscribing to it for a monthly fee.
Oh, wait, are their customers the consumers who purchase their products, or the developers who write software for their products? Or are they the media companies who sell music and movies on iTunes?
Apple wants all of them to be its customers--it wants to make money from all of them for everything that happens.
It's got to stop somewhere--and it ought to be at the first-sale doctrine. But the practical solution is to support Android instead. On the other hand, if Apple is allowed to get away with this forever, and they keep growing, it may become the accepted norm--or is it already?
What is it with these stupid Arkansas jokes? Arkansas is just as developed and civilized as anywhere else in the USA. One can find low-class, uneducated people in every state and every major city in the country, even the world. By making such inane comments, you're showing your ignorance or prejudice. Grow up.