Seriously, the last thing the internet needs is another fucking government entity sitting on top of it, enforcing all sorts of totalitarian political favoritism (mostly towards the left) under the guise of 'freedom.' The US used to stand up to this rubbish.. I wish it still did.
1. The Human rights council is largely made up of islamic states. it's been effectively bored out from the back end and is demonstrated by the ban on criticism of sharia and other islamic tenets. the UN is has a long history of 'hate speech' censorship for certain groups. the left wing bias on what constitutes human rights is blatantly obvious.
2. I don't know if an axiom exists for this or not, but organizations tend to collect power to themselves while redistributing the responsibility for use of them as far as possible. I don't claim a 'conspiracy', but I can almost guarantee that the 'globalization' push has not gone untalked about and/or actively pushed by various subcommittees for the sake of some cause or other. Really, the only way to prevent this is to actively resist it. It's the only way to protect individual rights. I want my government to do this, but alas it is not to be it seems.
3. As an american, the fact that an empowered UN could pull end runs around the US constitution in terms of rights and taxation certainly bothers me. hell my own government has been attempting and partially succeeding at this for the last 50 years. It's bad enough with what we have already, thanks. I don't want another government on top of the feds that's even less accessible to the average citizen than they are.
4. The UN's obsession with the israel/arab conflict is a serious issue, to me anyway. It's a case of worrying over the past instead of looking towards the future. those states need to fucking grow up, or have their shitty war without the rest of us getting involved. maybe we should let them have at it, sans support from the civilized world.
Anyway, having them run the internet will reduce freedom of expression and activity on the network. It will NOT increase or protect it. the US government is just as guilty as china of censorship, just in economic areas, so balkanization is already here. The UN would simply give countries like china, india, and the islamic states even more power to dictate user behavior on a global scale. Personally, I do'nt care what china/india/islam does with their networks as their citizens have the responsibility to stand up to their own overlords if they're unhappy, but I certainly do not want their interests enforced here in the states. The borders protect peace.
stuff like this is where the right wing gets the whole 'democrats hate america' thing from. this guy should be working towards america becoming 'the' space authority in the world, not by force, necessarily, but by technology and drive.
companies like yours are the other half of the orwellian statist leftarded mentality. without you, they couldn't take our rights away with each passing bill.
how is broadcasting publicly inherently linked to loss of privacy? it's possible to do it without losing privacy.. if you meant 'should' instead of 'is', then I disagree. in such a society, there'd be no privacy unless you hole up in a closet for life.
because, for some types of games, 60fps isn't enough. also, you can't have a constant framerate.. as the scene changes, the framerate will change, so most games are targeted somewhere above it and capped later.. quake4 was capped at 60fps and it bombed because of it (and other reasons too).. by the time they uncapped it, the community had already died.
Re:Windows 8 seems like a solid product
on
Windows 8 Is Ready
·
· Score: 1
it would also silence large amounts of unpopular truth around here, which would NOT benefit the majority of threads.
scare the crap out of those who fear change and hate spending money.
enough of this stupid ad hom already. it doesn't address the issues.
It is like an internet global profile that links yours phone, laptops, work desktop, and xbox 360 live account together.
What is cool about the installer linked to your hotmail/outlook account is that you can log into any Windows 8 machine and have all your settings and even corporate apps if your office uses Exchange 2010/2013!
I can't begin to imagine the security issues with such cross workstation use of a windows user profile. I can guarantee that crumbs will be left behind with sensitive data in them. Seriously, why is everyone suddenly so damned interested in trading their privacy and security for small amounts of inflexible, user-hostile 'convenience'?
how much did they pay you to write that? metro is horrible on a desktop.. it is NOT a workable compromise.. waaay too much clicking for baseline tasks compared with the old win95 model.
if the new wonderGUI feature is typing in search boxes, why have a gui at all? switching between mouse and keyboard is clunky.. any design should work to minimize these context switches, as well as things like modal intrusions.. ie starting a new program should not steal the entire screen from whatever's in front of you.
the fact you find the search box the most effective way of finding what you need suggests failure, not success on the part of metro.
because I've used it. it's obvious the thing was meant to be used as is, with very little tweaking.. I've already tried to explain why they don't include the tweak tool. it's for the same reasons microsoft doesn't want you messing with that 'command bar' in windows 7 or the full screen start menu in windows 8 (apple does similar things with osx, to the point of threatening lawsuits against 3rd party skins/hacks). the attitude is 'it's just better, get used to it' rather than 'here's what we think is a sane default, but you can customize it as much as you like.'
it might be possible to fix these with a hack, but one shouldn't need hacks for basic functionality. if that's what's needed, the software's broken. it's better to replace the whole thing (hence MATE). writing javascript patches for things isn't exactly user friendly, which is what the gnome people were supposedly going for..friendly as in mouthbreathing moron friendly. these people will never write javascript in their lives. hell, most programmers are too lazy to write code for functionality that should only require a single click-drag. if we're back to writing code for everything, why have a GUI at all? desktop environments are supposed to provide flexibility for the user to define his own workflow by providing reasonable building blocks with intuitive hints, and a sane set of default layouts to start with. it really is a case of 'undevelopment' as these capabilities have been around for the last 15 years or more. why remove them? reading the mailing list suggests they're so far up the ivory tower, they're breathing vacuum, and honestly, it shows. they want to find 'the one true workflow' and force everyone to use it. this is ass-backwards.
face it, the days of people spending $20 on stupid beer drinking and fart apps are long over.. this is why most mobile devs saying stuff like this are butthurt.. people won't pay for crap anymore. they will however pay for substantial apps that are reliable at the required task....on any platform.
1. they dont' want input from users. they don't want users tweaking its innards. users are expected to update their workflows and expectations to the 'one true path.' 2. sure there is. if gnome 3 is going the flat-learning-curve/flat-power-curve route... 3. no they couldn't, well, not as easily. gnome2 is say 90% of what modern users want. it's easier to add the 10% and get it working well, than rewriting half of gnome3 and resyncing their changes with every gnome release. 4. talk to the gnome3 devs.. their demagoguery is the problem. their slavish apple chasing attitude is another.
it's possible to have aesthetics without compromising functionality, but that's not what these new interfaces do (gnome 3/unity/metro/windows phone/ios'd osx etc). they sacrifice functionality (lots of it) for the sake of looks and a flat learning curve.. the problem is that flat learning curves come with flat power curves. it doesn't need to be either extreme, just a sane default in the middle somewhere, with extensibility/configurability to get it where the user needs it.
One of the (Few) things I hate about OSS is the naming.. the name of the program shouldn't be so obscure that even most nerds would have to look it up.. it should be a simple and intuitive title that describes the software's purpose.
Slashdot Mirror
if ntldr is modified, it won't pass the hash check and the UEFI loader won't execute it.
Seriously, the last thing the internet needs is another fucking government entity sitting on top of it, enforcing all sorts of totalitarian political favoritism (mostly towards the left) under the guise of 'freedom.' The US used to stand up to this rubbish.. I wish it still did.
1. The Human rights council is largely made up of islamic states. it's been effectively bored out from the back end and is demonstrated by the ban on criticism of sharia and other islamic tenets. the UN is has a long history of 'hate speech' censorship for certain groups. the left wing bias on what constitutes human rights is blatantly obvious.
2. I don't know if an axiom exists for this or not, but organizations tend to collect power to themselves while redistributing the responsibility for use of them as far as possible. I don't claim a 'conspiracy', but I can almost guarantee that the 'globalization' push has not gone untalked about and/or actively pushed by various subcommittees for the sake of some cause or other. Really, the only way to prevent this is to actively resist it. It's the only way to protect individual rights. I want my government to do this, but alas it is not to be it seems.
3. As an american, the fact that an empowered UN could pull end runs around the US constitution in terms of rights and taxation certainly bothers me. hell my own government has been attempting and partially succeeding at this for the last 50 years. It's bad enough with what we have already, thanks. I don't want another government on top of the feds that's even less accessible to the average citizen than they are.
4. The UN's obsession with the israel/arab conflict is a serious issue, to me anyway. It's a case of worrying over the past instead of looking towards the future. those states need to fucking grow up, or have their shitty war without the rest of us getting involved. maybe we should let them have at it, sans support from the civilized world.
Anyway, having them run the internet will reduce freedom of expression and activity on the network. It will NOT increase or protect it. the US government is just as guilty as china of censorship, just in economic areas, so balkanization is already here. The UN would simply give countries like china, india, and the islamic states even more power to dictate user behavior on a global scale. Personally, I do'nt care what china/india/islam does with their networks as their citizens have the responsibility to stand up to their own overlords if they're unhappy, but I certainly do not want their interests enforced here in the states. The borders protect peace.
well it's obvious bolden wants to mix politics with space exploration.. I'd rather have someone more results oriented.
if we gave them the budgets they want, would they keep us there or spend it on muslim relations? see how stupid politics are?
unfortunately, you're right..
http://www.space.com/8725-nasa-chief-bolden-muslim-remark-al-jazeera-stir.html
stuff like this is where the right wing gets the whole 'democrats hate america' thing from. this guy should be working towards america becoming 'the' space authority in the world, not by force, necessarily, but by technology and drive.
companies like yours are the other half of the orwellian statist leftarded mentality. without you, they couldn't take our rights away with each passing bill.
how is broadcasting publicly inherently linked to loss of privacy? it's possible to do it without losing privacy.. if you meant 'should' instead of 'is', then I disagree. in such a society, there'd be no privacy unless you hole up in a closet for life.
because, for some types of games, 60fps isn't enough. also, you can't have a constant framerate.. as the scene changes, the framerate will change, so most games are targeted somewhere above it and capped later.. quake4 was capped at 60fps and it bombed because of it (and other reasons too).. by the time they uncapped it, the community had already died.
it would also silence large amounts of unpopular truth around here, which would NOT benefit the majority of threads.
fingerprints..
what? no.. windows me, like win98se, supported both the old vxd kernel driver interface and the newer WDM interface. they weren't separate versions..
good.. then we can get rid of the whole gui while we're at it, right? if you're gonna type everything, just use a damn CLI.
...things are so stupid nowadays I can't honestly tell if you're joking or not..
scare the crap out of those who fear change and hate spending money.
enough of this stupid ad hom already. it doesn't address the issues.
It is like an internet global profile that links yours phone, laptops, work desktop, and xbox 360 live account together.
What is cool about the installer linked to your hotmail/outlook account is that you can log into any Windows 8 machine and have all your settings and even corporate apps if your office uses Exchange 2010/2013!
I can't begin to imagine the security issues with such cross workstation use of a windows user profile. I can guarantee that crumbs will be left behind with sensitive data in them. Seriously, why is everyone suddenly so damned interested in trading their privacy and security for small amounts of inflexible, user-hostile 'convenience'?
why would we regret it?
so instead of addressing his points, you resort to ad hom character assaults?
how much did they pay you to write that? metro is horrible on a desktop.. it is NOT a workable compromise.. waaay too much clicking for baseline tasks compared with the old win95 model.
if the new wonderGUI feature is typing in search boxes, why have a gui at all? switching between mouse and keyboard is clunky.. any design should work to minimize these context switches, as well as things like modal intrusions.. ie starting a new program should not steal the entire screen from whatever's in front of you.
the fact you find the search box the most effective way of finding what you need suggests failure, not success on the part of metro.
because I've used it. it's obvious the thing was meant to be used as is, with very little tweaking.. I've already tried to explain why they don't include the tweak tool. it's for the same reasons microsoft doesn't want you messing with that 'command bar' in windows 7 or the full screen start menu in windows 8 (apple does similar things with osx, to the point of threatening lawsuits against 3rd party skins/hacks). the attitude is 'it's just better, get used to it' rather than 'here's what we think is a sane default, but you can customize it as much as you like.'
it might be possible to fix these with a hack, but one shouldn't need hacks for basic functionality. if that's what's needed, the software's broken. it's better to replace the whole thing (hence MATE). writing javascript patches for things isn't exactly user friendly, which is what the gnome people were supposedly going for..friendly as in mouthbreathing moron friendly. these people will never write javascript in their lives. hell, most programmers are too lazy to write code for functionality that should only require a single click-drag. if we're back to writing code for everything, why have a GUI at all? desktop environments are supposed to provide flexibility for the user to define his own workflow by providing reasonable building blocks with intuitive hints, and a sane set of default layouts to start with. it really is a case of 'undevelopment' as these capabilities have been around for the last 15 years or more. why remove them? reading the mailing list suggests they're so far up the ivory tower, they're breathing vacuum, and honestly, it shows. they want to find 'the one true workflow' and force everyone to use it. this is ass-backwards.
yeah, but those are niche applications, right? I'm talking about clicking start on a linux desktop and not having a clue what an 'ekiga' is.
face it, the days of people spending $20 on stupid beer drinking and fart apps are long over.. this is why most mobile devs saying stuff like this are butthurt.. people won't pay for crap anymore. they will however pay for substantial apps that are reliable at the required task....on any platform.
1. they dont' want input from users. they don't want users tweaking its innards. users are expected to update their workflows and expectations to the 'one true path.'
2. sure there is. if gnome 3 is going the flat-learning-curve/flat-power-curve route...
3. no they couldn't, well, not as easily. gnome2 is say 90% of what modern users want. it's easier to add the 10% and get it working well, than rewriting half of gnome3 and resyncing their changes with every gnome release.
4. talk to the gnome3 devs.. their demagoguery is the problem. their slavish apple chasing attitude is another.
should implies a better alternative.. what is that?
it's possible to have aesthetics without compromising functionality, but that's not what these new interfaces do (gnome 3/unity/metro/windows phone/ios'd osx etc). they sacrifice functionality (lots of it) for the sake of looks and a flat learning curve.. the problem is that flat learning curves come with flat power curves. it doesn't need to be either extreme, just a sane default in the middle somewhere, with extensibility/configurability to get it where the user needs it.
One of the (Few) things I hate about OSS is the naming.. the name of the program shouldn't be so obscure that even most nerds would have to look it up.. it should be a simple and intuitive title that describes the software's purpose.