All the fanatical atheists I have meet have been reformed theists. Their hate is part of their liberation process.
You're right, I did go to a convent when I was a boy, but I'm over it now. Tux does give me a little shiver up the spine when I see him unexpectedly, but most of the time, I can use Linux without anxiety.
Levity aside, I don't really hate theists, but I do find hypocrisy irritating. We've had close to a decade where hypocritical moralists (like Thompson) have been on the ascendency, and it looks like the tide is finally turning. I'm just taking the opportunity to sink the boot while they're on the way down...
As far as the gpp's comments go, my original post had no reference to deities at all, so I suppose (s)he was responding to my sig. I personally wouldn't read hatred into it; I chose it because it was thought provoking. I guess some people could see that as an act of aggression.
I applaud your attempted misreading of your quoted citation:
And I applaud your ability to spin even the most minor quibble by the authors into a denial of the finding.
The section I quoted was from the précis of the full article. A summary if the findings, in other words. That summary states clearly that homophobic men were observed to respond to gay sex where non-homophobic men did not.
It is an observation, where Barlow's paper suggests that anxiety causes the response is a hypothesis.
If you choose to believe a large collection of random homophobes simultaneously produced boners at a gay stag movie because they were scared, when an equal number of non-homophobes did not, then I'll not argue, but that still lives us with an obvious conclusion.
I started out in surveying with an 11c, but when we got our first Total Stations (Wild T1000/D1000s), we switched to the 41c. It took me about 60 seconds to write a Fibonacci sequencer for it (The first code I ever wrote was a Fibonacci sequencer on punchcards for a Cyber 72, and I've continued the tradition...).
All of the geos, surveyors and engineers were issued those HPs, and it was astonishing to see how complex some of the programs got. Very versatile and tough little machines.
While I sometimes think accusing political homophobes of being closet homosexuals, I often wonder whether some of these individuals are or not.
Most likely they are.
There was a study performed in the '90s where both normal and homophobic men were shown heterosexual and gay porn. They found;
Both groups exhibited increases in penile circumference to the heterosexual and female homosexual videos. Only the homophobic
men showed an increase in penile erection to male homosexual stimuli. The groups did not differ in aggression. Homophobia is apparently associated with homosexual arousal that the homophobic individual is either unaware of or denies. http://www.oogachaga.com/downloads/homophobia_and_homosexual_arousal.pdf
All the others, including linux, still suffer in my eyes with ease of use
On a phone?
The UI on a Linux phone is very unlikely to resemble any existing Linux desktop any more than the iPhone GUI resembles Aqua.
There's plenty of space for a phone with a UI that has more depth than an iPhone, and more consistency than Windows Mobile. I've just dumped my iMate JasJam for a Sony Ericsson M600i, and it was like taking a breath of fresh air. Symbian/UIQ is much more rational than Windows CE, but I'd still prefer an OS I could customise, and the form factor of the M600 isn't as useful as the iMate.
For me, a Linux phone would be the best of both worlds. If there were any available, I'd have one in my pocket now.
65535 is common in computing because it's the highest number which can be represented by an unsigned 16 bit binary. If Excel is mishandling it somewhere in the background, chances are that failure will show up at multiple points.
If I had an important Excel 2007 spreadsheet, I'd be loading it up in OOo Calc or an older version of Excel now.
This has the flavor of a Geek-sanctioned urban legend.
I doubt it.
If you look at what it costs to have a tech clean a computer, it's pretty close to the purchase price of a new one. This article in the New York Times is a bit old, but new computers are even cheaper now.
The thing about Windows is: it just freakin' works for the non-technically-inclined.
There was an article in our local paper last week about people throwing away malware infested computers because it cost more to clean them than replace them.
Does that sound like Windows is "just freakin' working"?
Wine is a re-implementation of the Win32 API, and is VERY carefully reviewed to ensure it doesn't infringe on copyright. That's one of the reasons why it's such a difficult task.
A problem with reverse engineering Win32 is the lack of information. Microsoft has consistently refused to provide this, and even removes older documentation, so a significant effort for Wine is in writing independent documentation of the Windows API.
A better answer would be to require all APIs to be documented and for the documentation to be freely available.
I can see it now... waves of people returning their "broken" computers....
But why?
Have a look at this laptop from a second-tier computer builder's website. Scroll about a third of the way down the page to the "Operating Systems" checkbox. Note that you can choose between None, Ubuntu, XP, and a collection of Vista versions.
Imagine a future version of the same field, but with "MacOS XVIII", "Plan 10" "FreeBeOS", "ReactOS Hurd", "AmigaOS Phoenix", etc, etc in the list. Real choice, in other words.
Now imagine a world where you could click any one of those OS choices and be confident your data would be usable, that you could connect to any network you needed to, that your investment in software would be portable. A world where you could choose your OS based on price, performance and personal taste, not on format lockin and obfuscated communication protocols.
Microsoft's monopoly depends on a legally protected special privilege, which is already anti free-market. Removing the privilege would be a difficult option, so attacking one of the symptoms (bundling is also a consequence of monopoly, not just a cause) is being recommended instead.
2) the CISRO submitted it's work to an INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS BODY. par of submitting technology to a STANDARDS BODY is the release for ANYONE to duplicate the STANDARD free of charge.
No that's not even vaguely true.
CSIRO disclosed the patent to the IEEE in 1997, and IEEE acknowledged that part of the technology used in the new 802.11 standards was covered under CSIRO's patents. The IEEE asked CSIRO, as it does all companies that hold patents on technology used in a standard, if it wanted to license the technology to the industry for free or if it wanted to charge a reasonable fee for the license. CSIRO indicated it wanted to charge a fee for the use of its technology.
Slashdot Mirror
Those licenses govern distribution, not usage.
If you want a service level agreement for FOSS, negotiate one with the distributor of the software.
Talk nicely to the ReactOS guys.
Their re-implementation of Windows is a 25meg download.
What does it do? I have NoScript, and there's no way I'm turning it on for a site that doesn't explain itself.
How do we get rid of waste at night then?
You're right, I did go to a convent when I was a boy, but I'm over it now. Tux does give me a little shiver up the spine when I see him unexpectedly, but most of the time, I can use Linux without anxiety.
Levity aside, I don't really hate theists, but I do find hypocrisy irritating. We've had close to a decade where hypocritical moralists (like Thompson) have been on the ascendency, and it looks like the tide is finally turning. I'm just taking the opportunity to sink the boot while they're on the way down...
As far as the gpp's comments go, my original post had no reference to deities at all, so I suppose (s)he was responding to my sig. I personally wouldn't read hatred into it; I chose it because it was thought provoking. I guess some people could see that as an act of aggression.
Whoops, that should be "Barlow's paper which suggests that anxiety..."
And I applaud your ability to spin even the most minor quibble by the authors into a denial of the finding.
The section I quoted was from the précis of the full article. A summary if the findings, in other words. That summary states clearly that homophobic men were observed to respond to gay sex where non-homophobic men did not.
It is an observation, where Barlow's paper suggests that anxiety causes the response is a hypothesis.
If you choose to believe a large collection of random homophobes simultaneously produced boners at a gay stag movie because they were scared, when an equal number of non-homophobes did not, then I'll not argue, but that still lives us with an obvious conclusion.
Homophobes are either queer or wimps.
Geez, that takes me back.
I started out in surveying with an 11c, but when we got our first Total Stations (Wild T1000/D1000s), we switched to the 41c. It took me about 60 seconds to write a Fibonacci sequencer for it (The first code I ever wrote was a Fibonacci sequencer on punchcards for a Cyber 72, and I've continued the tradition...).
All of the geos, surveyors and engineers were issued those HPs, and it was astonishing to see how complex some of the programs got. Very versatile and tough little machines.
Most likely they are.
There was a study performed in the '90s where both normal and homophobic men were shown heterosexual and gay porn. They found;
Both groups exhibited increases in penile circumference to the heterosexual and female homosexual videos. Only the homophobic men showed an increase in penile erection to male homosexual stimuli. The groups did not differ in aggression. Homophobia is apparently associated with homosexual arousal that the homophobic individual is either unaware of or denies. http://www.oogachaga.com/downloads/homophobia_and_homosexual_arousal.pdfOn a phone?
The UI on a Linux phone is very unlikely to resemble any existing Linux desktop any more than the iPhone GUI resembles Aqua.
There's plenty of space for a phone with a UI that has more depth than an iPhone, and more consistency than Windows Mobile. I've just dumped my iMate JasJam for a Sony Ericsson M600i, and it was like taking a breath of fresh air. Symbian/UIQ is much more rational than Windows CE, but I'd still prefer an OS I could customise, and the form factor of the M600 isn't as useful as the iMate.
For me, a Linux phone would be the best of both worlds. If there were any available, I'd have one in my pocket now.
I knew about it, and would have bought CDs, but it's US only.
It could be for Excel users.
65535 is common in computing because it's the highest number which can be represented by an unsigned 16 bit binary. If Excel is mishandling it somewhere in the background, chances are that failure will show up at multiple points.
If I had an important Excel 2007 spreadsheet, I'd be loading it up in OOo Calc or an older version of Excel now.
Oh come on! It's mainstream to admit Vista is a dog.
Even hacks like Rob Enderle are saying it like it is.
Well said.
That phrase captures the dilemma of software freedom precisely. Can I paraphrase it for my .sig?
You forgot to add in the cost of time and knowledge. They're the big gotcha here.
Don't whine.
At least it qualified you for that job with Microsoft.
I doubt it.
If you look at what it costs to have a tech clean a computer, it's pretty close to the purchase price of a new one. This article in the New York Times is a bit old, but new computers are even cheaper now.
There was an article in our local paper last week about people throwing away malware infested computers because it cost more to clean them than replace them.
Does that sound like Windows is "just freakin' working"?
Wine is already completely legal.
Wine is a re-implementation of the Win32 API, and is VERY carefully reviewed to ensure it doesn't infringe on copyright. That's one of the reasons why it's such a difficult task.
A problem with reverse engineering Win32 is the lack of information. Microsoft has consistently refused to provide this, and even removes older documentation, so a significant effort for Wine is in writing independent documentation of the Windows API.
A better answer would be to require all APIs to be documented and for the documentation to be freely available.
But why?
Have a look at this laptop from a second-tier computer builder's website. Scroll about a third of the way down the page to the "Operating Systems" checkbox. Note that you can choose between None, Ubuntu, XP, and a collection of Vista versions.
Imagine a future version of the same field, but with "MacOS XVIII", "Plan 10" "FreeBeOS", "ReactOS Hurd", "AmigaOS Phoenix", etc, etc in the list. Real choice, in other words.
Now imagine a world where you could click any one of those OS choices and be confident your data would be usable, that you could connect to any network you needed to, that your investment in software would be portable. A world where you could choose your OS based on price, performance and personal taste, not on format lockin and obfuscated communication protocols.
That's the world Microsoft is fighting against.
No, you're wrong.
Microsoft's monopoly depends on a legally protected special privilege, which is already anti free-market. Removing the privilege would be a difficult option, so attacking one of the symptoms (bundling is also a consequence of monopoly, not just a cause) is being recommended instead.
Precisely right. Interestingly enough, the community is fighting back. http://www.linchpinlabs.com/resources/atsiv/usage-design.htm
Microsoft cannot allow open drivers because that would allow computer users to circumvent Vista DRM. It doesn't look like they'll win this one.
C:/Windows/System32/Debug.exe *
* Some assembly required.
The Kiwis have about 43.1 million sheep, or roughly 12 sheep for every person in New Zealand.
Australia has about 110 million sheep, or about 5 sheep per person. Additionally, more Welsh migrants settled in New Zealand than Australia.
With all due respect to our south-sea pom mates, I think it's pretty clear which nation leads the world in sheep-shagging...
No that's not even vaguely true.
CSIRO disclosed the patent to the IEEE in 1997, and IEEE acknowledged that part of the technology used in the new 802.11 standards was covered under CSIRO's patents. The IEEE asked CSIRO, as it does all companies that hold patents on technology used in a standard, if it wanted to license the technology to the industry for free or if it wanted to charge a reasonable fee for the license. CSIRO indicated it wanted to charge a fee for the use of its technology.