Nope, this doesn't change your power rating at all, it increases gain by adding directionality to your omni or dipole antenna. Bounce the signal of the back and to thr front and you've got a higher gain and receive sensitivity w/o modifying power.
This is NOT an upgrade for your antenna. This doesn't increase gain, it just takes it from the back and adds to the front. The good thing about this method is it doesn't require you to modify your original antenna, so you don't have to worry about breaking FCC regulations on all equipment being certified. Apart from that, they are selling for $25 something which I created for free out of household items. Check here for more info on how to do it yourself (took me all of 30 minutes the first time).
But again, I want to state this isn't an upgrade, your antenna isn't any more powerful, you're just taking power from the back and shooting it forward, so if you need omnidirectional signal this isn't for you. It can however, increase a dirctional link, but so can a pringles yagi directional, and that's still cheaper than this. Forget about this company and just make your own, it's simple, fun, and cheap, and gives you more of a choice in what material you want to use.
First, only deal with people you trust. Second, Read, Read, Read! Read everything you can on the facts and myths of ANY new drug. Find out what the expected experience is and if it's something you think you'd like to partake in. LSD (And psilocybin prodcuing mushrooms)trips can the greatest and most enlightening experience, but it can also be terrifying if you don't take the right precautions. - What enviroment, music, people etc etc should I be in/with/etc.
Make sure you feel good about yourself and who you are. Psychadelics will often give you an objective view about yourself, but sometimes you might fixate on something about yourself or your curent life situation. This can be a good thing, but mentally exhausting, and certainly not recreational. If you see yourself going in that direction and you don't want to, put on some cartoons or a funny show, it will pull your attention away from your current train of thought.
For the first time, it's best to be around someone you are comforatable with, who is experienced with psychadelics. Stay in a private place and plan on not going anywhere. If possible, have a friend that can drive you where you need to go if you absolutely have to leave. Otherwise, stock up on any supplies beforehand. If you smoke marijuana have a good amount of it onhand, you probably won't feel much like smoking it, but if your trip gets too much for you (your adrenaline will be pumping) the weed can take the edge off. If you smoke cigaretets, be sure to have plenty of those around too.
- If things go bad, what can others do to help me through it?
Have a friend you can call, or failing that just jump on irc and look for LSD related channels. Most of these people are kind, caring, and most of all understanding of what you're going through. Also know that it si near impossible to overdose on LSD. The closest thing I can think of is where a few meth heads snorted two lines of the pure powder, thinking it was meth. They went comatose, but I beleive all cam eout of it ok. Of course, what they took was the equivalent to probably an entire "Bible" which is what a book of LSD sheets is called. The LD50 for psychadelic mushrooms is roughly your own body weight, and I think eating anything in the amount of your own body weight would probably kill you. If you think you are going to die, don't worry, you aren't. This is of course assuming the substances you got are legit.
well maybe your aunt should be put in jail for allowing an 11 year access to the internet. If she can't do that responsibly, then she is a HORRIBLE parent, and to me that more of a HORROR than any of the disturbing things I've seen on the internet. Your aunt was irresponsible and negligent in the raising of her child, and you want to blame the internet for that? Take a little responsibility for your own actions and quit letting tv and internet raise your children.
Who modded this up as insightful? Of course you can stay anonymous forever on the internet. This guy didn't get caught via the internet, he gave out his own name! If he hadn't done that they very well might never have caught him. Besides that, his point wasn't to stay anonymous, it was to extort a company through technology without being caught. If you want to stay anonymous on the internet, there are a ton of ways to do so, some legal, some not. My point is you can stay as anonymous asyou like. How is subpoenaing the ISP logs going to help when he did all his cracking through other people's open wireless? He could aslo have been spoofing his MAC address so that even if a wireless PA owner caught his activity in logs, the "identifying number" could be obviously bogus, or even misleading. This guy got caught because he was an idiot, not because you can't stay anonymous on the internet.
Re:It Doesn't Show That At All!
on
Xgrid Agent for Unix
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
If everyone was going ot be using Linux PC's in their cluster, they would just use one of the existing clustering applications. The only reason anyone would use Xgrid is because they plan on using SOME mac nodes, which is better than none. This could increase sales by opening up Macintosh hardware to projects that couldn't use it before. Due to the cost of a Mac hardware, it is often not feasible to build an all Mac cluster, but if I can throw some G5's in here and there Apple gets some of my money as opposed to none.
Well lets see why: No GPS data integration No SSID collection Can only actively detect networks (Kismet does passive scanning, which enables it to find many more networks than say netstumbler, which is an active scanner) Can only show you if you are in range of a wireless network or not
basically this thing is for finding if you're in range. It's the wireless equivalent to a cable tester. War driving is all about finding and mapping networks, not checking if you're just "in range of a network". This thing might be good for feild testing, but as a war driving tool it lacks the most basic features.
"The two games that are really holding me from running Linux on my desktop full-time are Unreal Tournament 2004 and C&C Generals Zero Hour."
I guess you didn't pay for UT2K4 or you might have seen that it supports linux on the box. The Linux install binary sits right next to the windows binary in the root directory. It plays better on my Linux partition than it does on my Windows. C&C I don't know about and don't play, but ut2004 has NATIVE linux support, which beats playing a game under wienx any day
I don't think they'd be isolating themseleves (anymore so than they are now, willingly). There's no reason that they couldn't develop gateways to interface with foriegn technology. It's not like compatable technologies won't be available, they'll still be made over there to be shipped to first world countries, and I'm sure they'd be happy to sell to the chinese people as well. If this brings lower cost technology to the people, I'm all for it. If it's intended as a means of information isolation, then of course they can make that happen, but I don't think that's the case here. It seems like they genuinely want to get out of patent costs, which is why they have a national Linux distribution. Truly Open standards aren't patent encumbered, and maybe they'll open up some of their tech to us, and we end up being the ones who adopt it, as an open and perhaps better standard.
I've long since lost the URL's to the exact tutorials I used, but here's the url I used to find it:) http://www.google.com/search?q=creating+distri bute d+applications&sourceid=mozilla-search&start=0&sta rt=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
Well if you read the license that comes with the software you would see that it provides no gurantees and no warannty. If someone uses it in a mission critical environment and it fails, liability would fall on the person who implemented it. If you don't want to take that responsability use software that takes it for you, like QNX.
BS, I've written several clustered applications for geophysical data computation and bioinforamtics. There are several tutorials on designing an application to make use of distributed power, and both OSS/FSF and commercial toolkits and API's to help you accomplish the same. Designing a distributed application is not difficult at all.
"Whats stopping your office network into becoming a big distributed pool for all your apps? It certainly isn't the hardware."
For one thing, most applications don't NEED distributed processing, since current PCs are designed to handle most current software. How is more CPU power gonna help me write an email in Evolution faster? More CPU power, will, however help applications like gcc or autocad that do need or could make good use of alot of processing power.
"If Sony had come up with a software model, or a toolkit, to turn any arbitary app into a optimised distributed computation THEN I would be impressed."
What they are doing is exactly this, but on a hardware level, which would be a much more elegant solution. Of course, being Sony, this will all be proprietary stuff, so don't expect to be buying cell based barebones systems off of newgegg. It will most likely only work with sony or sony approved devices.
Apart from that I think you're looking at it all wrong, clustering systems now are all implemented on a software level, what sony is proposing is abstracting this to the hardware layer so that you don't have to worry about writing a distributed app, the hardware handles that for you. If this was in place you could theoretically cluster any application.
"We can't even blame MS - Linux gear is just as bloated."
I call bullshit on that. If you mean OSS versus Proprietary software, then yes, software in general has become bloated, but to accuse Linux of becoming bloated is ridiculous. I run a linux firewall on a 386 with 8MB of RAM on a 40MB HDD. I'd really like to see someone do that with MS software. Also, keep in mind you are expecting more from your software these days. THere's nothing stopping you from staying with your 3.1 system other than you want better performance with newer applications.
Sorry, but if this is true and the full source code has been released to the public, I can pretty much gurantee you there will be vulnerabilities found. The likleyhood that in the entire codebase, there exists not a single flaw is scientifically insignificant. We may not see any vulnerabilities the likes of "print 500 A's on login: " but you can bet there's something that will let someone do something they aren't supposed to. The chances of vulns coming from this are alot greater than the chances more vendor implemented backdoors are found, and that wouldn't suprise me in the least.
"Globalisation is not going away. Outsourcing is not going away. IT jobs in the US are going away."
"I took my meager savings and moved to a place where the cost of living is low, but infrastructure is well developed"
Ok so we can tell from you statement that you really don't give a shit about America or the state thereof. Some of us actually love our country and would rather see the problems with it get fixed rather than just giving up on it and moving elsewhere. If "earning a living" was just cause to pack up and move, there'd have been no one left in this country after the depression.
1: The one thing I cannot get in America is ameobic dissentary by drinking the public drinking water.
Oh please, you're argument holds no water. Outsourcing has nothing to do globalization of the economy. Until Intel starts having to sell their processors at rates as low as I could get an import from another country without import taxes. The US govt. protects it's businesses from compettion in the foreign sector via tarriffs and taxes, bvut the people are not provided the same protection. If you want a "truly" global economy, you MUST drop import taxes. If I could buy a meal for 50 cents, I wouldn't need to make 40K+ a year top support a family. If I could buy PC componoents made in china at the actual cost the chinese mgfr would charge, my PC wouldn't cost >$1000. This "get used to it, it's the way things are" is a total crap argument. It has nothing to do with globalization, it has to do with maximimizing business profit while taking advantage of laws set to protect business.
We need either to drop import taxes and take up a free trade agreement globablly, or provide US citizens with the same protection that allows these corporations to exist and be profitable in the first place.
Re:Sophistry
on
SimChurch
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Actually, your logic would be the sophistry, as the burden of "proof" lies as much with the atheists as it does with the theist. You must prove that God does not and can not exist as an atheist. You can't do that, just as the theist can't prove the opposite. The only beleif that can be proven is that of agnosticism. I can conclusively prove that you cannot prove that god does not exist. I can also prove that you can't prove that he does. You don't know, and you CAN'T prove it, it's impossible, so both atheist and theists alike adhere to their beliefs with blind faith.
Why does Linux need this one singular desktop? Who is going to benefit from lack of choice?
It's called interface consistency.
That's not interface consistency at all. Interface consistency lies at the API or application layer, what you are thinking of is called "Developer Lock-in". If I choose to write with GTK, I have interface consistency both in codebase and run time user interface, across all platforms. If I choose QT instead, I get the same. Select boxes, text input, etc all work the same, and can look exactly the same, or unique, depending on each users individual preference. You fear choice, and that's sad.
How the hell do you expect commercial vendors to write for your system if it's 10 different moving targets?
The same way they do now. You seem to be under the impression that there aren't commercial applications out there for Linux. Maybe you should try looking, they are everywhere. This just goes to show how ignorant you are of development processes in a heterogeneous envrionment, probably due to your unreasonable fear of choice. In a development context, multitudes of development tools is a benefit, not a drawback. This is just as true for Windows as Linux. Or perhaps you weren't aware there are any other windowing toolkits available for win32 apart from what Microsoft offers? In fact there are more for Windows than there are for Linux, as most Linux tool kits are cross platform.
Have you ever programmed in.NET? How about Cocoa? Developers are raving about those solutions--and they're not complaining, "Oh, I wish I had five other toolkits to choose from so I could have CHOICE! My whole world revolves around CHOICE!" No, their world revolves around getting the damn job done, and their jobs are made a lot harder when there is no stable platform to target.
Yes I've programmed in both and they are both quite nice, but neither is cross platform. I've also used third party API's for both that were quite nice and not cross platform. And what developers are raving about cocoa or.NET? You and your brother Daryl? They are nice, but nothing revolutionary, just something finally on par with third party solutions. Anyone who raves about them obviously comes from using inferior toolkits.
Congratulatuions, you have two ENTIRE DESKTOP ENVIRONMENTS installed along with a third window manager just to run those apps, when you should have just needed ONE. Thanks for proving the point.
No, I have two different sets of libraries installed, but it's nice to see you don't understand the difference. I also only have one window manager installed. The fact you assume I would have KDE and Gnome fully installed shows how little you understand about the Linux desktop. Why should I have needed only one library? Do I only need one.dll to run any Windows app? Do I have the necessary libraries and tools to compile my app in a default windows install? No, I don't. I have to download a statically built binary or get the required libraries. There is no fucking difference, but the one you make up in your pseudo-logic.
Like most OSS fanboys, you believe one mentality should apply to absolutely everything, instead of realizing that what needs to be done for one thing might be different for something else.
And yet you still haven't offered one single reason why giving a choice is harmful, you merely state that it is and base all further arguments on this one misguided base. If you want a single desktop distro, build your own or get one of the tons out there like SuSe. Or get one like redhat that makes the difference negligible to the end user. These things can be done because the developers have a choice. You propose that this choice be taken away, but with no insights on to who it would help or how. Right, we should all volunteer our free time to work on projects which may be compeltely out of line with what our personal goals are. But it
This is absolute crap. Every time a story like this someone comes along and posts a "What Linux needs is Unity!!" post, acting as if they were some sort of prophet sent to lead Linux to the promise land.
"What desktop linux needs is ONE desktop to replace them all. That is; one set of widgets, one way of doing everything, and one interface for developing gui apps for linux."
Why does Linux need this one singular desktop? Who is going to benefit from lack of choice? Do you really expect developers to give up their choice in what to develop with, just because you think it will help more people adopt Linux. Where on kernel.org do you see that goal of "Get everyone off of windows and onto a Linux Desktop"? Where on KDE's site do you see the goal of "Being the ONE TRUE Linux desktop." I like having a choice in my desktop, and I like having a choice in my development tools.
"This kind of dictatorship works dandy at the core level of linux, and needs to be extended to include the GUI, or the "linux desktop" will remain a flamewar of competing technologies, each trying to copy what the "top-down" managed software is doing."
First off, this isn't the kind of dictatorship that is used in kernel development, the "top-down" management you speak of doesn't exist. Linus doesn't decide by himself the roadmap for the kernel, he doesn't dictate what the developers should use, or how they should code, he just makes sure that anything put in the kernel is quality.
"As long as there is choice, there will be no breakthrough. One more choice won't help either."
That is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. As long as there is a choice, there will be no breakthrough? Perhaps we should all ditch Linux, OS X, BeOS, BSD or whatever else for Windows, because having a choice is apparently bad for innovation, and as long as we choose to fight over what OS to use, there wil be no breakthroughs.
" but now with a plethora of applications developed on the different desktops, incompatible with eachother, there will be no survival of the fittest. "
Where the hell is all this incompatability you speak of? Right now I'm running fluxbox with several KDE and Gnome apps open. They don't tell me "Fuck you, I'm not gonna work if you have those other guys' libraries installed!". And please explain how having less choice would contribute to survival of the fittest? If there's only one desktop, with no competition, what pushes it to be the fittest?
"All the desktop technologies seem doomed to live side by side forever. sigh."
That's funny, because they've all grown and improved drastically over they years, despite the thousands of people like you telling them they are going about it wrong. Gnome just released another version, with tons of improvements, but I guess they might as well not have, since their software is doomed to stagnate.
Serious people. stop whining about what Linux needs. Everyone's needs are different, and the fact that it gives us a choice is where the real power of OSS lies, and it's what truly gives us what we need. If your goal is to get Linux on every desktop, great, go for it, but don't try to bend the world to your whim at the cost of taking away my choice, or else we all might as well have statyed with MS.
Choice is good. Period. Dumbing things down on a development level is a horrible idea, dumbing them down on a distro level is smarter.
For those of us who use our desktops as a PVR instead of dedicating a machine to it, I highly recommend a TvTime and vcr combination under Linux. MythTV is a overkill for my needs. TvTime is hands down the best tv viewing program, IMO, and there are web frontends for vcr to make scheduling recordings as snap. There are some features lacking in this setup that a normal PVR system would have, such as live rewind and such, but I think there's alot of people going through way more trouble than they need to because they don't know there's any other way..
Slashdot Mirror
Nope, this doesn't change your power rating at all, it increases gain by adding directionality to your omni or dipole antenna. Bounce the signal of the back and to thr front and you've got a higher gain and receive sensitivity w/o modifying power.
This is NOT an upgrade for your antenna. This doesn't increase gain, it just takes it from the back and adds to the front. The good thing about this method is it doesn't require you to modify your original antenna, so you don't have to worry about breaking FCC regulations on all equipment being certified. Apart from that, they are selling for $25 something which I created for free out of household items. Check here for more info on how to do it yourself (took me all of 30 minutes the first time).
But again, I want to state this isn't an upgrade, your antenna isn't any more powerful, you're just taking power from the back and shooting it forward, so if you need omnidirectional signal this isn't for you. It can however, increase a dirctional link, but so can a pringles yagi directional, and that's still cheaper than this. Forget about this company and just make your own, it's simple, fun, and cheap, and gives you more of a choice in what material you want to use.
- How do I ensure I'm getting the real thing?
First, only deal with people you trust.
Second, Read, Read, Read! Read everything you can on the facts and myths of ANY new drug. Find out what the expected experience is and if it's something you think you'd like to partake in. LSD (And psilocybin prodcuing mushrooms)trips can the greatest and most enlightening experience, but it can also be terrifying if you don't take the right precautions.
- What enviroment, music, people etc etc should I be in/with/etc.
Make sure you feel good about yourself and who you are. Psychadelics will often give you an objective view about yourself, but sometimes you might fixate on something about yourself or your curent life situation. This can be a good thing, but mentally exhausting, and certainly not recreational. If you see yourself going in that direction and you don't want to, put on some cartoons or a funny show, it will pull your attention away from your current train of thought.
For the first time, it's best to be around someone you are comforatable with, who is experienced with psychadelics. Stay in a private place and plan on not going anywhere. If possible, have a friend that can drive you where you need to go if you absolutely have to leave. Otherwise, stock up on any supplies beforehand. If you smoke marijuana have a good amount of it onhand, you probably won't feel much like smoking it, but if your trip gets too much for you (your adrenaline will be pumping) the weed can take the edge off. If you smoke cigaretets, be sure to have plenty of those around too.
- If things go bad, what can others do to help me through it?
Have a friend you can call, or failing that just jump on irc and look for LSD related channels. Most of these people are kind, caring, and most of all understanding of what you're going through. Also know that it si near impossible to overdose on LSD. The closest thing I can think of is where a few meth heads snorted two lines of the pure powder, thinking it was meth. They went comatose, but I beleive all cam eout of it ok. Of course, what they took was the equivalent to probably an entire "Bible" which is what a book of LSD sheets is called. The LD50 for psychadelic mushrooms is roughly your own body weight, and I think eating anything in the amount of your own body weight would probably kill you. If you think you are going to die, don't worry, you aren't. This is of course assuming the substances you got are legit.
- Any other pointers?
Have fun, be safe, act responsibly.
well maybe your aunt should be put in jail for allowing an 11 year access to the internet. If she can't do that responsibly, then she is a HORRIBLE parent, and to me that more of a HORROR than any of the disturbing things I've seen on the internet. Your aunt was irresponsible and negligent in the raising of her child, and you want to blame the internet for that? Take a little responsibility for your own actions and quit letting tv and internet raise your children.
Who modded this up as insightful? Of course you can stay anonymous forever on the internet. This guy didn't get caught via the internet, he gave out his own name! If he hadn't done that they very well might never have caught him. Besides that, his point wasn't to stay anonymous, it was to extort a company through technology without being caught. If you want to stay anonymous on the internet, there are a ton of ways to do so, some legal, some not. My point is you can stay as anonymous asyou like. How is subpoenaing the ISP logs going to help when he did all his cracking through other people's open wireless? He could aslo have been spoofing his MAC address so that even if a wireless PA owner caught his activity in logs, the "identifying number" could be obviously bogus, or even misleading. This guy got caught because he was an idiot, not because you can't stay anonymous on the internet.
If everyone was going ot be using Linux PC's in their cluster, they would just use one of the existing clustering applications. The only reason anyone would use Xgrid is because they plan on using SOME mac nodes, which is better than none. This could increase sales by opening up Macintosh hardware to projects that couldn't use it before. Due to the cost of a Mac hardware, it is often not feasible to build an all Mac cluster, but if I can throw some G5's in here and there Apple gets some of my money as opposed to none.
Well lets see why:
No GPS data integration
No SSID collection
Can only actively detect networks (Kismet does passive scanning, which enables it to find many more networks than say netstumbler, which is an active scanner)
Can only show you if you are in range of a wireless network or not
basically this thing is for finding if you're in range. It's the wireless equivalent to a cable tester. War driving is all about finding and mapping networks, not checking if you're just "in range of a network". This thing might be good for feild testing, but as a war driving tool it lacks the most basic features.
"The two games that are really holding me from running Linux on my desktop full-time are Unreal Tournament 2004 and C&C Generals Zero Hour."
I guess you didn't pay for UT2K4 or you might have seen that it supports linux on the box. The Linux install binary sits right next to the windows binary in the root directory. It plays better on my Linux partition than it does on my Windows. C&C I don't know about and don't play, but ut2004 has NATIVE linux support, which beats playing a game under wienx any day
Here is a pretty good one, I remembered this being in one of my Linux magazines, and lucky for you they publish articles online as well :)
I don't think they'd be isolating themseleves (anymore so than they are now, willingly). There's no reason that they couldn't develop gateways to interface with foriegn technology. It's not like compatable technologies won't be available, they'll still be made over there to be shipped to first world countries, and I'm sure they'd be happy to sell to the chinese people as well. If this brings lower cost technology to the people, I'm all for it. If it's intended as a means of information isolation, then of course they can make that happen, but I don't think that's the case here. It seems like they genuinely want to get out of patent costs, which is why they have a national Linux distribution. Truly Open standards aren't patent encumbered, and maybe they'll open up some of their tech to us, and we end up being the ones who adopt it, as an open and perhaps better standard.
I've long since lost the URL's to the exact tutorials I used, but here's the url I used to find it :)i bute d+applications&sourceid=mozilla-search&start=0&sta rt=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
http://www.google.com/search?q=creating+distr
No, GPL is a license to DISTRIBUTE, not a license to USE. You may use GPL software any way you see fit, the only restrictions are on distributing it.
Well if you read the license that comes with the software you would see that it provides no gurantees and no warannty. If someone uses it in a mission critical environment and it fails, liability would fall on the person who implemented it. If you don't want to take that responsability use software that takes it for you, like QNX.
"Distributed SOFTWARE is FREAKEN HARD."
BS, I've written several clustered applications for geophysical data computation and bioinforamtics. There are several tutorials on designing an application to make use of distributed power, and both OSS/FSF and commercial toolkits and API's to help you accomplish the same. Designing a distributed application is not difficult at all.
"Whats stopping your office network into becoming a big distributed pool for all your apps? It certainly isn't the hardware."
For one thing, most applications don't NEED distributed processing, since current PCs are designed to handle most current software. How is more CPU power gonna help me write an email in Evolution faster? More CPU power, will, however help applications like gcc or autocad that do need or could make good use of alot of processing power.
"If Sony had come up with a software model, or a toolkit, to turn any arbitary app into a optimised distributed computation THEN I would be impressed."
What they are doing is exactly this, but on a hardware level, which would be a much more elegant solution. Of course, being Sony, this will all be proprietary stuff, so don't expect to be buying cell based barebones systems off of newgegg. It will most likely only work with sony or sony approved devices.
Apart from that I think you're looking at it all wrong, clustering systems now are all implemented on a software level, what sony is proposing is abstracting this to the hardware layer so that you don't have to worry about writing a distributed app, the hardware handles that for you. If this was in place you could theoretically cluster any application.
"We can't even blame MS - Linux gear is just as bloated."
I call bullshit on that. If you mean OSS versus Proprietary software, then yes, software in general has become bloated, but to accuse Linux of becoming bloated is ridiculous. I run a linux firewall on a 386 with 8MB of RAM on a 40MB HDD. I'd really like to see someone do that with MS software. Also, keep in mind you are expecting more from your software these days. THere's nothing stopping you from staying with your 3.1 system other than you want better performance with newer applications.
Sorry, but if this is true and the full source code has been released to the public, I can pretty much gurantee you there will be vulnerabilities found. The likleyhood that in the entire codebase, there exists not a single flaw is scientifically insignificant. We may not see any vulnerabilities the likes of "print 500 A's on login: " but you can bet there's something that will let someone do something they aren't supposed to. The chances of vulns coming from this are alot greater than the chances more vendor implemented backdoors are found, and that wouldn't suprise me in the least.
"Globalisation is not going away. Outsourcing is not going away. IT jobs in the US are going away."
"I took my meager savings and moved to a place where the cost of living is low, but infrastructure is well developed"
Ok so we can tell from you statement that you really don't give a shit about America or the state thereof. Some of us actually love our country and would rather see the problems with it get fixed rather than just giving up on it and moving elsewhere. If "earning a living" was just cause to pack up and move, there'd have been no one left in this country after the depression.
1: The one thing I cannot get in America is ameobic dissentary by drinking the public drinking water.
Oh please, you're argument holds no water. Outsourcing has nothing to do globalization of the economy. Until Intel starts having to sell their processors at rates as low as I could get an import from another country without import taxes. The US govt. protects it's businesses from compettion in the foreign sector via tarriffs and taxes, bvut the people are not provided the same protection. If you want a "truly" global economy, you MUST drop import taxes. If I could buy a meal for 50 cents, I wouldn't need to make 40K+ a year top support a family. If I could buy PC componoents made in china at the actual cost the chinese mgfr would charge, my PC wouldn't cost >$1000. This "get used to it, it's the way things are" is a total crap argument. It has nothing to do with globalization, it has to do with maximimizing business profit while taking advantage of laws set to protect business.
We need either to drop import taxes and take up a free trade agreement globablly, or provide US citizens with the same protection that allows these corporations to exist and be profitable in the first place.
Actually, your logic would be the sophistry, as the burden of "proof" lies as much with the atheists as it does with the theist. You must prove that God does not and can not exist as an atheist. You can't do that, just as the theist can't prove the opposite. The only beleif that can be proven is that of agnosticism. I can conclusively prove that you cannot prove that god does not exist. I can also prove that you can't prove that he does. You don't know, and you CAN'T prove it, it's impossible, so both atheist and theists alike adhere to their beliefs with blind faith.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Not joking, trolling. This troll has been around for a few years.
Why does Linux need this one singular desktop? Who is going to benefit from lack of choice?
.NET? How about Cocoa? Developers are raving about those solutions--and they're not complaining, "Oh, I wish I had five other toolkits to choose from so I could have CHOICE! My whole world revolves around CHOICE!" No, their world revolves around getting the damn job done, and their jobs are made a lot harder when there is no stable platform to target.
.NET? You and your brother Daryl? They are nice, but nothing revolutionary, just something finally on par with third party solutions. Anyone who raves about them obviously comes from using inferior toolkits.
.dll to run any Windows app? Do I have the necessary libraries and tools to compile my app in a default windows install? No, I don't. I have to download a statically built binary or get the required libraries. There is no fucking difference, but the one you make up in your pseudo-logic.
It's called interface consistency.
That's not interface consistency at all. Interface consistency lies at the API or application layer, what you are thinking of is called "Developer Lock-in". If I choose to write with GTK, I have interface consistency both in codebase and run time user interface, across all platforms. If I choose QT instead, I get the same. Select boxes, text input, etc all work the same, and can look exactly the same, or unique, depending on each users individual preference. You fear choice, and that's sad.
How the hell do you expect commercial vendors to write for your system if it's 10 different moving targets?
The same way they do now. You seem to be under the impression that there aren't commercial applications out there for Linux. Maybe you should try looking, they are everywhere. This just goes to show how ignorant you are of development processes in a heterogeneous envrionment, probably due to your unreasonable fear of choice. In a development context, multitudes of development tools is a benefit, not a drawback. This is just as true for Windows as Linux. Or perhaps you weren't aware there are any other windowing toolkits available for win32 apart from what Microsoft offers? In fact there are more for Windows than there are for Linux, as most Linux tool kits are cross platform.
Have you ever programmed in
Yes I've programmed in both and they are both quite nice, but neither is cross platform. I've also used third party API's for both that were quite nice and not cross platform. And what developers are raving about cocoa or
Congratulatuions, you have two ENTIRE DESKTOP ENVIRONMENTS installed along with a third window manager just to run those apps, when you should have just needed ONE. Thanks for proving the point.
No, I have two different sets of libraries installed, but it's nice to see you don't understand the difference. I also only have one window manager installed. The fact you assume I would have KDE and Gnome fully installed shows how little you understand about the Linux desktop. Why should I have needed only one library? Do I only need one
Like most OSS fanboys, you believe one mentality should apply to absolutely everything, instead of realizing that what needs to be done for one thing might be different for something else.
And yet you still haven't offered one single reason why giving a choice is harmful, you merely state that it is and base all further arguments on this one misguided base. If you want a single desktop distro, build your own or get one of the tons out there like SuSe. Or get one like redhat that makes the difference negligible to the end user. These things can be done because the developers have a choice. You propose that this choice be taken away, but with no insights on to who it would help or how. Right, we should all volunteer our free time to work on projects which may be compeltely out of line with what our personal goals are. But it
This is absolute crap. Every time a story like this someone comes along and posts a "What Linux needs is Unity!!" post, acting as if they were some sort of prophet sent to lead Linux to the promise land.
"What desktop linux needs is ONE desktop to replace them all. That is; one set of widgets, one way of doing everything, and one interface for developing gui apps for linux."
Why does Linux need this one singular desktop? Who is going to benefit from lack of choice? Do you really expect developers to give up their choice in what to develop with, just because you think it will help more people adopt Linux. Where on kernel.org do you see that goal of "Get everyone off of windows and onto a Linux Desktop"? Where on KDE's site do you see the goal of "Being the ONE TRUE Linux desktop." I like having a choice in my desktop, and I like having a choice in my development tools.
"This kind of dictatorship works dandy at the core level of linux, and needs to be extended to include the GUI, or the "linux desktop" will remain a flamewar of competing technologies, each trying to copy what the "top-down" managed software is doing."
First off, this isn't the kind of dictatorship that is used in kernel development, the "top-down" management you speak of doesn't exist. Linus doesn't decide by himself the roadmap for the kernel, he doesn't dictate what the developers should use, or how they should code, he just makes sure that anything put in the kernel is quality.
"As long as there is choice, there will be no breakthrough. One more choice won't help either."
That is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. As long as there is a choice, there will be no breakthrough? Perhaps we should all ditch Linux, OS X, BeOS, BSD or whatever else for Windows, because having a choice is apparently bad for innovation, and as long as we choose to fight over what OS to use, there wil be no breakthroughs.
" but now with a plethora of applications developed on the different desktops, incompatible with eachother, there will be no survival of the fittest. "
Where the hell is all this incompatability you speak of? Right now I'm running fluxbox with several KDE and Gnome apps open. They don't tell me "Fuck you, I'm not gonna work if you have those other guys' libraries installed!". And please explain how having less choice would contribute to survival of the fittest? If there's only one desktop, with no competition, what pushes it to be the fittest?
"All the desktop technologies seem doomed to live side by side forever. sigh."
That's funny, because they've all grown and improved drastically over they years, despite the thousands of people like you telling them they are going about it wrong. Gnome just released another version, with tons of improvements, but I guess they might as well not have, since their software is doomed to stagnate.
Serious people. stop whining about what Linux needs. Everyone's needs are different, and the fact that it gives us a choice is where the real power of OSS lies, and it's what truly gives us what we need. If your goal is to get Linux on every desktop, great, go for it, but don't try to bend the world to your whim at the cost of taking away my choice, or else we all might as well have statyed with MS.
Choice is good. Period. Dumbing things down on a development level is a horrible idea, dumbing them down on a distro level is smarter.
Why don't you show us an equivalent database that would handle the same traffic without error? Because you can't? Oh..
No idea what it is offhand, but here is the total of the postings so far..
E )6 6EYB9FJ*CI*6FIZBIJK*SM+6VM [BYNL+#Q,7&T ]?;W^/GZ_\0`' P$``P$!`0$!' B(F*DI.4E9:7F)F:HJ.DI::GJ*FJLK.TM;:WN+FZPL/$Q ;GZ.GJ\O/T]?;W^/GZ_]H`#`,!``(1`Q$`/ P#NO$5JEUXQJ 6J&8I&-H8#KD# &#[UM>)=NQX-_:DOK)^8HKZ(_X0[0/^?*+_`+X%%;LCE]I$ CU7_D,O_P!D `
M#!D2$P\4'1H?'AT:'!P@)"XG("(L(QP7J#A(6&AXB)BI*3
MQ\C)RM+3U-76U]C9VN'BX^3EYN?HZ>KQ\O/
M`0$!`0````````$"`P0%!@'EZ@H.$
MA8:
M3?IXN(TM_G8H"`%&>3_2N3\0(E]H]Y=V$36
=T_D:T-!_Y!1_WJ**B/\`%9_X,2S1117:!__]
`
e nd
before the decoding you will remember to remove all "whitespace"
-----
For those of us who use our desktops as a PVR instead of dedicating a machine to it, I highly recommend a TvTime and vcr combination under Linux. MythTV is a overkill for my needs. TvTime is hands down the best tv viewing program, IMO, and there are web frontends for vcr to make scheduling recordings as snap. There are some features lacking in this setup that a normal PVR system would have, such as live rewind and such, but I think there's alot of people going through way more trouble than they need to because they don't know there's any other way..