I understand the metaphor. I'm just not quite sure why it would be a good idea to mimic the worst part of working on a real desk (clutter) rather than using the organizational advantage that computers can give us.
That's why I say we get rid of the damn thing. That's what your home directory is for; there's no reason to put stuff in a useless place like the desktop as well, where it will be obscured whenever you actually start doing things.
Of course, I don't think they were talking about desktop icons in TFA. I just wanted to throw in my anti-icon rant here.
Another simple way to do it under Linux is to use the ever-popular xbindkeys program to launch your file manager wherever you like. So any keystroke (including extra "media" keys), mouse button, or combination of the two can be easily made to open whatever directory you like. You just need an.xbindkeysrc file that contains a line like:
"nautilus $HOME"
control+shift + b:1
Now, when xbindkeys is running, Control-Shift-Left_Mouse would start Nautilus in your home directory (assuming Nautilus works as I assume it does -- I don't bother with GUI file managers).
So we're supposed to listen to someone with a great need to tell others what art is rather than using our own brains? Admit it, the term "art" has no function other than to make you and yours feel cultured.
It's a waste of time to even think about this question. Every work has many aspects worth noting, and none of them appear or disappear based on whether the establishment is willing to call it art. A person interested in art for its own sake doesn't care whether the work in question is a bona fide work of art, because that person is busy experiencing and examining the work. The only people who really care about whether something is art are the ones whose egos stand to gain from it: artists and art critics. Artists because they are fragile and need to be validated, and art critics because they would be out of a job (and worse, a reputation!) if everyone noticed that "art" is an insignificant distinction.
I don't mean to recommend that we lower our standards -- certainly some works are more worthy of note than others -- but a work's worthiness does not depend on where it falls on the "art" continuum. It depends on many orthogonal factors which are different for every medium, and are only apparent to those with deep knowledge of the field. It's worth mentioning here that art experts, by and large, are not video game experts. They are in no position to make any sort of judgement about video games, whether that judgement is (artp video-games) or something entirely different.
Why not just use your right hand to hold the stylus? Sure it would take practice, but if I had to reach across what I was looking at to scroll I'd learn to use my left hand. It can't be that hard.
I believe the ipw2200 driver, which I use, had issues with WPA when I first tried it. I think they've been resolved, but I haven't needed to use it yet, so I don't know.
I never did say that Linux is better than Windows in the wireless arena. You missed my point entirely. I'll try to lay it out more simply for you, without all the anecdotes to confuse you. 1. For some people (e.g. you) Linux has problems with wireless. For others (e.g. me) it works great. 2. For some people (e.g. me) Windows has problems with wireless. For others (e.g. you) it works great. 3. Based on the above, it's safe to say that wireless isn't very good under Linux or Windows, even though there are success stories with both OSes.
When I mentioned how well my wireless chipset (ipw2200) worked under Linux, I was trying to show that it's not the chipset itself that won't work right, since it works fine with another OS. When I talked about how badly it worked under Windows I *really wasn't talking about Linux*. I was talking about Windows, and how its wireless networking can be as problematic as anything. Notice how I also admitted that there are significant problems with WiFi in Linux.
"As for your Windows problems, I have no idea. You remind of a random Linux guy who just can't get Windows to work nevermind the weird shit you do to tweak windows out." Yeah, I have no idea either. I'll say one thing for Linux, at least when something doesn't work I can usually figure out why. Not that it always helps.
Probably the reason I remind you of a "random Linux guy who just can't get Windows to work" is because I *am* a random Linux guy who just can't get Windows to work.
I'm not sure Windows takes this category either. It's true that Linux has some big WiFi problems (WPA and chipset support, namely), but my experience with wifi in Windows has been even worse (!) than my Linux experience. Setting up WPA worked, although my successes and failures seemed to occur randomly. When actually using WiFi, I get failed connections, random disconnections, and the like regularly. Currently, my computer connects to the access point just fine, but all the while it tells me I'm disconnected. After five minutes or so it loses the connection and I get to wait for Windows to go through its exceedingly slow connection process again. On top of that, it's nearly impossible to figure out what's going on from the Windows wireless network configuration screens.
By way of contrast the same computer, running Linux, connects perfectly and stays that way, even if I turn off the antenna for a while. It works so well that I never even use the wired interface. On the other hand, I wasn't able to get WPA working when I tried it. I haven't taken a look at it for a while, so the software may have matured.
I'm not trying to say that Linux is particularly good with WiFi, just that Windows's wireless networking is as screwy as the rest of the OS.
"...it's good enough and that's the best we'll ever get."
Whether it's "good enough" is debatable, but "the best we'll ever get?" How the hell do you figure? Do you honestly believe that Microsoft Windows will always be the best OS around (assuming that it currently is, of course)?
While I love Descent, I'm not sure how much it advanced the genre. It spawned its two sequels, but dead ended there. There were how many other 6dof games? Two, with a third in the works. The same goes for Thief. While it's one of the best FPSes ever, first person sneakers never really caught on. Most FPSes are still of the "shoot everything" variety.
Nah, you're not the time keeper. Or at least you shouldn't be. Everyone has the responsibility to play in time. You're more like the time enhancer, since its you're job to accent beats for the audience in a way that other intstruments can't. Of course, in practice its often up to the drummer and bassist to keep the guitars near tempo.
If you need to put together click tracks, try Hydrogen, a free software drum sequencer. Its overkill, but it should work fine. (Don't get too loud though, and wear hearing protection! Drums can easily destroy your hearing. I realize that your metronome may just be a quiet one, but that warning can't be overstated.) You could also use Audacity to export simple click tracks, but you can't make it click only on certain beats, so it's limited as a practice tool.
A good trick for working on your time is to set the metronome to play only two beats when you're good with one, and every four beats after that, and so on. When you can go that long between clicks, and still be in time, you're pretty solid. Playing at extremely slow speeds is also good for this.
I almost said the same, but I didn't think it would help my "I like Emacs" case. Plus it's a little dated. Still, I'm glad someone else took the time to say it.
Slashdot Mirror
I understand the metaphor. I'm just not quite sure why it would be a good idea to mimic the worst part of working on a real desk (clutter) rather than using the organizational advantage that computers can give us.
Don't forget the camp that considers them both bloated and forgoes them for something else. The Ratpoison/wmii/dwm/Ion/TWM/PekWM/*box using crowd.
That's why I say we get rid of the damn thing. That's what your home directory is for; there's no reason to put stuff in a useless place like the desktop as well, where it will be obscured whenever you actually start doing things.
Of course, I don't think they were talking about desktop icons in TFA. I just wanted to throw in my anti-icon rant here.
That was sarcasm, by the way. As long as the batteries in question are only about as likely to kill us as gasoline, I don't see a problem.
Yeah, TWM all the way!
If you wanted to keep your music to yourself, you wouldn't put it on the Internet at all.
No one would ever drive a car powered by something that could explode.
Yeah! I bet that if they wanted to, they could make batteries that could be "refilled" (so to speak) when they ran out of power. Conspiracy.
They don't make room for more icons, you know.
Another simple way to do it under Linux is to use the ever-popular xbindkeys program to launch your file manager wherever you like. So any keystroke (including extra "media" keys), mouse button, or combination of the two can be easily made to open whatever directory you like. You just need an .xbindkeysrc file that contains a line like:
"nautilus $HOME"
control+shift + b:1
Now, when xbindkeys is running, Control-Shift-Left_Mouse would start Nautilus in your home directory (assuming Nautilus works as I assume it does -- I don't bother with GUI file managers).
About as easy to set up, and even easier to use.
So we're supposed to listen to someone with a great need to tell others what art is rather than using our own brains? Admit it, the term "art" has no function other than to make you and yours feel cultured.
It's a waste of time to even think about this question. Every work has many aspects worth noting, and none of them appear or disappear based on whether the establishment is willing to call it art. A person interested in art for its own sake doesn't care whether the work in question is a bona fide work of art, because that person is busy experiencing and examining the work. The only people who really care about whether something is art are the ones whose egos stand to gain from it: artists and art critics. Artists because they are fragile and need to be validated, and art critics because they would be out of a job (and worse, a reputation!) if everyone noticed that "art" is an insignificant distinction.
I don't mean to recommend that we lower our standards -- certainly some works are more worthy of note than others -- but a work's worthiness does not depend on where it falls on the "art" continuum. It depends on many orthogonal factors which are different for every medium, and are only apparent to those with deep knowledge of the field. It's worth mentioning here that art experts, by and large, are not video game experts. They are in no position to make any sort of judgement about video games, whether that judgement is (artp video-games) or something entirely different.
Why not just use your right hand to hold the stylus? Sure it would take practice, but if I had to reach across what I was looking at to scroll I'd learn to use my left hand. It can't be that hard.
"(Score:1, Interesting)"
Isn't Slashdot wonderful? Although I would have marked it insightful myself.
I believe the ipw2200 driver, which I use, had issues with WPA when I first tried it. I think they've been resolved, but I haven't needed to use it yet, so I don't know.
Existing seems to be HyperScope's big advantage.
I never did say that Linux is better than Windows in the wireless arena. You missed my point entirely. I'll try to lay it out more simply for you, without all the anecdotes to confuse you.
1. For some people (e.g. you) Linux has problems with wireless. For others (e.g. me) it works great.
2. For some people (e.g. me) Windows has problems with wireless. For others (e.g. you) it works great.
3. Based on the above, it's safe to say that wireless isn't very good under Linux or Windows, even though there are success stories with both OSes.
When I mentioned how well my wireless chipset (ipw2200) worked under Linux, I was trying to show that it's not the chipset itself that won't work right, since it works fine with another OS. When I talked about how badly it worked under Windows I *really wasn't talking about Linux*. I was talking about Windows, and how its wireless networking can be as problematic as anything. Notice how I also admitted that there are significant problems with WiFi in Linux.
"As for your Windows problems, I have no idea. You remind of a random Linux guy who just can't get Windows to work nevermind the weird shit you do to tweak windows out."
Yeah, I have no idea either. I'll say one thing for Linux, at least when something doesn't work I can usually figure out why. Not that it always helps.
Probably the reason I remind you of a "random Linux guy who just can't get Windows to work" is because I *am* a random Linux guy who just can't get Windows to work.
I'm not sure Windows takes this category either. It's true that Linux has some big WiFi problems (WPA and chipset support, namely), but my experience with wifi in Windows has been even worse (!) than my Linux experience. Setting up WPA worked, although my successes and failures seemed to occur randomly. When actually using WiFi, I get failed connections, random disconnections, and the like regularly. Currently, my computer connects to the access point just fine, but all the while it tells me I'm disconnected. After five minutes or so it loses the connection and I get to wait for Windows to go through its exceedingly slow connection process again. On top of that, it's nearly impossible to figure out what's going on from the Windows wireless network configuration screens.
By way of contrast the same computer, running Linux, connects perfectly and stays that way, even if I turn off the antenna for a while. It works so well that I never even use the wired interface. On the other hand, I wasn't able to get WPA working when I tried it. I haven't taken a look at it for a while, so the software may have matured.
I'm not trying to say that Linux is particularly good with WiFi, just that Windows's wireless networking is as screwy as the rest of the OS.
"...it's good enough and that's the best we'll ever get."
Whether it's "good enough" is debatable, but "the best we'll ever get?" How the hell do you figure? Do you honestly believe that Microsoft Windows will always be the best OS around (assuming that it currently is, of course)?
While I love Descent, I'm not sure how much it advanced the genre. It spawned its two sequels, but dead ended there. There were how many other 6dof games? Two, with a third in the works. The same goes for Thief. While it's one of the best FPSes ever, first person sneakers never really caught on. Most FPSes are still of the "shoot everything" variety.
Maybe more people would learn with their computers if there was more software available.
Nah, you're not the time keeper. Or at least you shouldn't be. Everyone has the responsibility to play in time. You're more like the time enhancer, since its you're job to accent beats for the audience in a way that other intstruments can't. Of course, in practice its often up to the drummer and bassist to keep the guitars near tempo.
If you need to put together click tracks, try Hydrogen, a free software drum sequencer. Its overkill, but it should work fine. (Don't get too loud though, and wear hearing protection! Drums can easily destroy your hearing. I realize that your metronome may just be a quiet one, but that warning can't be overstated.) You could also use Audacity to export simple click tracks, but you can't make it click only on certain beats, so it's limited as a practice tool.
A good trick for working on your time is to set the metronome to play only two beats when you're good with one, and every four beats after that, and so on. When you can go that long between clicks, and still be in time, you're pretty solid. Playing at extremely slow speeds is also good for this.
I almost said the same, but I didn't think it would help my "I like Emacs" case. Plus it's a little dated. Still, I'm glad someone else took the time to say it.
Interesting... when I first looked at the comments there were a few for vi and none for Emacs. Now there are many more Emacs votes.
So I guess we've finally found out which editor is faster.
*Disclaimer: I like Emacs, really. It's taking up 40% of my screen right now.
Thank goodness we have AC to predict the future and save us all the trouble of waiting for it.