He shouldn't ignore the atheists. He should listen to them and make up his own damn mind about what he believes. If his faith is really justified, he will retain his beliefs, and get a deeper understanding of why he holds them.
It all depends on whether being gay is genetic or learned. Unless you have some breakthrough scientific evidence indicating the latter, you're really in no position to comment either way, are you?
You can't work with a pencil anymore. Teachers expect papers properly typed. They give you links to websites you need to visit to complete your work. Meanwhile, children have to deal with having to do research papers when there is no parent available to drive them to the library.
If your mind is so feeble that looking at pictures changes your outlook of an entire gender, then by all means abstain from looking at porn. In fact, don't expose yourself to anything else for that matter --- you're far too easily manipulated. There are perfectly sound reasons for not looking at porn (consider, for example, the conditions many women in the porn industry --- especially outside the US, are subjected to). Thinking its somehow going to hurt is not one of those reasons.
Its not a matter of whether its your right. Its definately your right. But is it right? Growing up, my parents were always lax with the rules, but very firm about expectations. As a result, both me and my brother were forced to develop personal responsibility --- something that is far more important in the real world than adherence to specific rules. I think the ideal is to be extremely involved, but still give children a bit of breathing room so they feel comfortable.
At some point, you're going to need an API to draw things on the screen. X is that API. If you want to write an application, don't write to X, write to a toolkit. Yes, there is more than one commonly available toolkit. But the only way you can prevent that is by tightly coupling the toolkit to the underlying graphics API. That's a *terrible* design from a "proper programming" point of view, and its not something that even Microsoft would do. Because of this, Microsoft suffers from the same problem. There are a number of toolkits for Windows too (Office uses a different toolkit from IE). Its a problem thats unavoidable on a large platform.
Now, Windows has it slightly easier because at least there is a standard set of services used by all the toolkits. This is exactly what freedesktop.org aims to be. Now, its just a matter of time until freedesktop.org subsumes the back-end things that make interoperability between KDE and GNOME apps difficult. The X world has reached a point where non freedesktop.org apps will be considered legacy. They'll still be around, but for all practical purposes, they won't be relavent in any discussions of desktop Linux (just as non-standard apps like Shake or XSI aren't relavent in discussions about desktop Windows).
Please read the f*cking agreement. The FreeQt foundation "controls the rights to the Qt Free Edition." The KDE developers have majority voting rights in that foundation (two TT votes, three KDE votes). If a company buys TT and tries to leverage it as a way to hurt KDE, the FreeQt foundation has the legal right to address the situation.
1) X - This was a neat idea, and has had a lot of time and innovation put in to it. However, it's still ununified, clumsy, confusing and bulky. When X works, it works great. When X doesn't work, it's a nightmare. >>>>>>>>>>>> Nobody complains that the GDI lacks unification, so why do people do the same for X? X is a drawing API. You can draw whatever you want with it. Same thing with X.
2) Lack of standardization. Simple things which should work and operate the same over many applications sometimes do not. Such is the case with cut & paste, which beyond not being 100% universal, is a really lousy implimentation. If you're like me, and you highlight the text you want to replace with what is in the clipboard, you'll know what I'm talking about. >>>>>>>>>> There is a universal clipboard API. There are bugs in it, but it should generally work between KDE and GNOME apps (which, going forward, are the only ones that will matter for mainstream desktop Linux). The main thing you have to understand is that cut-and-paste in Linux does *not* work like in Windows. Its more like a drag-and-drop for text than cut and paste.
3) Very basic things which should be autodetected and configured by XWindows are simply not. How long have scrollwheel mice been around? How about mice with more than three buttons? >>>>>>>>>>>> 4.3 configues my Logitech wheel mouse just fine. Any specific hardware that doesn't work for you?
A program used internally by the kernel to load drivers. You should never call insmod directly. The automatic hardware detection will do it for you. If that doesn't work, you should use modprobe, which is a very simple interface to module loading.
So basically, you want OSS people to innovate for you (most innovation comes out of research institutions, which open source a lot of their work) and then you want to use their work for free? Tough nuggets. Compete or go to a communist country where they ban competition.
Um, this isn't the Olympics. The government of Croatia does not go out of its way to get the best 11 coders to sign up for it. "Croatia" really has nothing to do with it. It just happens that the 11 programmers who happened to sign up from Croatia were better than the average US contestant. The only thing you can argue is that a sample of 11 programmers it not large enough to be statistically significant --- and thus not an accurate representation of the average programmer in Croatia.
You're method wouldn't work, not if you want the iPod to appear as a hard disk to the PC.
There needs to be an index of all the MP3 files on the disk for the iPod firmware to use. The UI needs to use the index to show all the song listings. So you need to build this index one way or the other. You can either have the host PC build it, or have the iPod build it itself from the files that are on the disk.
In order to use your method, you'd have to have the iPod build the index itself. That means that every time you sync the iPod, it would have to search its entire 10-40GB partition to see what songs have been added or removed. It would then have to read the first part of each file to get the ID3 information contained in the MP3 header. This is not only slow, but puts a lot of stress on the disk, and chews through a quarter of your battery each time you do it.
Now you're thinking: why does it have to search, why can't it just update the index for each file added or removed?
The answer is because it appears as a firewire harddisk! To the host PC, its just a block device. So the OS on the iPod doesn't ever get commands to "write this file to the disk." Instead, it gets commands to "write these 512 byte sectors to these locations." This means it has absolutely no idea when or where files are wrtten. All the filesystem-level stuff is handled by the host OS. It just gets a big stream of block writes right before the disk is mounted as the host OS flushes the disk cache.
So that's why the iPod interface has the host PC update the iTunesDB index. There is simply no practical way for the iPod to do it itself. You need a bare minimum of software.
I don't doubt that parents have the legal right to track ther children like that. However, is it right? In other words, are you going to raise good children by treating them like that? I don't really believe that a child who is so closely scrutanized every moment of the day can really develop the strong sense of personal responsibility that they need to be good people.
Phsycological research says that there are several levels of morality. The two most common are based on rules and principles, respectively. People whose system of morality is based on the former follow rules only because there is the potential for punishment. People in the latter catagory follow rules because they are simply expressions of higher moral principles. My biggest problem with this GPS thing is that it may raise children whose moral systems are in the former catagory rather than in the latter.
I've got an iPod, and I really can't agree with you. Its got lots of style, yes, but its very substantial. The thing is durable, very pocketable (I'm not willing to wear the thing on my belt like the guys with Archos jukeboxes are wont to do), has a lot of nice features (Linux compatibility!) and a very good interface. At the time I bought it, the only competition was from Nomad's Zen and eDigital's Oddessy, and both were substantially larger while being at most $50 cheaper. If you're looking for a pocketable 10G+ MP3 player, the iPod really is a no-brainer.
iPod's *are* just 1394 disks with firmware. You can plug it in and it looks just like a firewire harddrive. The iTunesDB file that the iPod uses to index files is proprietory, but is very simple and has been reverse-engineered by several programs (gnupod, ephpod, gtkpod, myPod, guipod, xplay, etc). The iPod OS gets the actual song information from ID3 tags. This is one major reason I bought the thing --- it has nearly perfect Linux support and no DRM.
That's what I've always had to do when I used RedHat versions earlier than Fedora. RedHat did a terrible disservice to the Linux world by not including something like APT in earlier RedHat versions. However, as a longtime user of Debian and Gentoo, I haven't encountered any problems like that except for the ocassional broken package. Its simply not something I think about anymore. Software installation and system updating is just a one-step process for me.
I don't agree with your assesments of Time, et al, but I will agree with you on one thing. >>>>>>>>>> That's precisely my point. I see a lot of conservative principles as wrong on face value. I simply have different priorities than most conservatives, which makes my interpretation of various events totally different. For example, when I see someone one Fox talking about ignoring the UN, it annoys me. To me, internationalization is more important than getting the absolute best deal for the US. To somebody who has different priorities, those statements may seem perfectly understandible and self-evident. So what seems like balanced reporting to one side seems horrible biased to the other. There is no point in trying to pretend differently.
Slashdot Mirror
He shouldn't ignore the atheists. He should listen to them and make up his own damn mind about what he believes. If his faith is really justified, he will retain his beliefs, and get a deeper understanding of why he holds them.
I don't think he meant anything by it. I mean, he's the autopr0n guy! He's gotta be more open-minded than that :)
It all depends on whether being gay is genetic or learned. Unless you have some breakthrough scientific evidence indicating the latter, you're really in no position to comment either way, are you?
All I can say is congratulations on a job well done :)
Yes! Protect them from virtual dangers (those scary pixels!) by beating them!
You can't work with a pencil anymore. Teachers expect papers properly typed. They give you links to websites you need to visit to complete your work. Meanwhile, children have to deal with having to do research papers when there is no parent available to drive them to the library.
And yes looking at porn on the net is a bad thing.
>>>>>>>>>>
Statements like that are the reason people can't resist cheap shots against God.
Try anything that'll connect to the edonkey network (overnet, mldonkey).
:)
Oh right. Like you weren't the least bit curious
If your mind is so feeble that looking at pictures changes your outlook of an entire gender, then by all means abstain from looking at porn. In fact, don't expose yourself to anything else for that matter --- you're far too easily manipulated. There are perfectly sound reasons for not looking at porn (consider, for example, the conditions many women in the porn industry --- especially outside the US, are subjected to). Thinking its somehow going to hurt is not one of those reasons.
Its not a matter of whether its your right. Its definately your right. But is it right? Growing up, my parents were always lax with the rules, but very firm about expectations. As a result, both me and my brother were forced to develop personal responsibility --- something that is far more important in the real world than adherence to specific rules. I think the ideal is to be extremely involved, but still give children a bit of breathing room so they feel comfortable.
At some point, you're going to need an API to draw things on the screen. X is that API. If you want to write an application, don't write to X, write to a toolkit. Yes, there is more than one commonly available toolkit. But the only way you can prevent that is by tightly coupling the toolkit to the underlying graphics API. That's a *terrible* design from a "proper programming" point of view, and its not something that even Microsoft would do. Because of this, Microsoft suffers from the same problem. There are a number of toolkits for Windows too (Office uses a different toolkit from IE). Its a problem thats unavoidable on a large platform.
Now, Windows has it slightly easier because at least there is a standard set of services used by all the toolkits. This is exactly what freedesktop.org aims to be. Now, its just a matter of time until freedesktop.org subsumes the back-end things that make interoperability between KDE and GNOME apps difficult. The X world has reached a point where non freedesktop.org apps will be considered legacy. They'll still be around, but for all practical purposes, they won't be relavent in any discussions of desktop Linux (just as non-standard apps like Shake or XSI aren't relavent in discussions about desktop Windows).
Please read the f*cking agreement. The FreeQt foundation "controls the rights to the Qt Free Edition." The KDE developers have majority voting rights in that foundation (two TT votes, three KDE votes). If a company buys TT and tries to leverage it as a way to hurt KDE, the FreeQt foundation has the legal right to address the situation.
1) X - This was a neat idea, and has had a lot of time and innovation put in to it. However, it's still ununified, clumsy, confusing and bulky. When X works, it works great. When X doesn't work, it's a nightmare.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
Nobody complains that the GDI lacks unification, so why do people do the same for X? X is a drawing API. You can draw whatever you want with it. Same thing with X.
2) Lack of standardization. Simple things which should work and operate the same over many applications sometimes do not. Such is the case with cut & paste, which beyond not being 100% universal, is a really lousy implimentation. If you're like me, and you highlight the text you want to replace with what is in the clipboard, you'll know what I'm talking about.
>>>>>>>>>>
There is a universal clipboard API. There are bugs in it, but it should generally work between KDE and GNOME apps (which, going forward, are the only ones that will matter for mainstream desktop Linux). The main thing you have to understand is that cut-and-paste in Linux does *not* work like in Windows. Its more like a drag-and-drop for text than cut and paste.
3) Very basic things which should be autodetected and configured by XWindows are simply not. How long have scrollwheel mice been around? How about mice with more than three buttons?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
4.3 configues my Logitech wheel mouse just fine. Any specific hardware that doesn't work for you?
A program used internally by the kernel to load drivers. You should never call insmod directly. The automatic hardware detection will do it for you. If that doesn't work, you should use modprobe, which is a very simple interface to module loading.
5. Just a side note, Fedora isn't exactly the examplar of Linux's efficiency and performance. Go Gentoo!
>>>>>>>>>
Hell, Debian is a big step up!
I love it when idiots are moderated up out of spite :) Public humiliation at its best!
So basically, you want OSS people to innovate for you (most innovation comes out of research institutions, which open source a lot of their work) and then you want to use their work for free? Tough nuggets. Compete or go to a communist country where they ban competition.
Judging by your English, I'm going to guess that you are not one of those academic aristocrats?
Um, this isn't the Olympics. The government of Croatia does not go out of its way to get the best 11 coders to sign up for it. "Croatia" really has nothing to do with it. It just happens that the 11 programmers who happened to sign up from Croatia were better than the average US contestant. The only thing you can argue is that a sample of 11 programmers it not large enough to be statistically significant --- and thus not an accurate representation of the average programmer in Croatia.
You're method wouldn't work, not if you want the iPod to appear as a hard disk to the PC.
There needs to be an index of all the MP3 files on the disk for the iPod firmware to use. The UI needs to use the index to show all the song listings. So you need to build this index one way or the other. You can either have the host PC build it, or have the iPod build it itself from the files that are on the disk.
In order to use your method, you'd have to have the iPod build the index itself. That means that every time you sync the iPod, it would have to search its entire 10-40GB partition to see what songs have been added or removed. It would then have to read the first part of each file to get the ID3 information contained in the MP3 header. This is not only slow, but puts a lot of stress on the disk, and chews through a quarter of your battery each time you do it.
Now you're thinking: why does it have to search, why can't it just update the index for each file added or removed?
The answer is because it appears as a firewire harddisk! To the host PC, its just a block device. So the OS on the iPod doesn't ever get commands to "write this file to the disk." Instead, it gets commands to "write these 512 byte sectors to these locations." This means it has absolutely no idea when or where files are wrtten. All the filesystem-level stuff is handled by the host OS. It just gets a big stream of block writes right before the disk is mounted as the host OS flushes the disk cache.
So that's why the iPod interface has the host PC update the iTunesDB index. There is simply no practical way for the iPod to do it itself. You need a bare minimum of software.
I don't doubt that parents have the legal right to track ther children like that. However, is it right? In other words, are you going to raise good children by treating them like that? I don't really believe that a child who is so closely scrutanized every moment of the day can really develop the strong sense of personal responsibility that they need to be good people.
Phsycological research says that there are several levels of morality. The two most common are based on rules and principles, respectively. People whose system of morality is based on the former follow rules only because there is the potential for punishment. People in the latter catagory follow rules because they are simply expressions of higher moral principles. My biggest problem with this GPS thing is that it may raise children whose moral systems are in the former catagory rather than in the latter.
I've got an iPod, and I really can't agree with you. Its got lots of style, yes, but its very substantial. The thing is durable, very pocketable (I'm not willing to wear the thing on my belt like the guys with Archos jukeboxes are wont to do), has a lot of nice features (Linux compatibility!) and a very good interface. At the time I bought it, the only competition was from Nomad's Zen and eDigital's Oddessy, and both were substantially larger while being at most $50 cheaper. If you're looking for a pocketable 10G+ MP3 player, the iPod really is a no-brainer.
iPod's *are* just 1394 disks with firmware. You can plug it in and it looks just like a firewire harddrive. The iTunesDB file that the iPod uses to index files is proprietory, but is very simple and has been reverse-engineered by several programs (gnupod, ephpod, gtkpod, myPod, guipod, xplay, etc). The iPod OS gets the actual song information from ID3 tags. This is one major reason I bought the thing --- it has nearly perfect Linux support and no DRM.
That's what I've always had to do when I used RedHat versions earlier than Fedora. RedHat did a terrible disservice to the Linux world by not including something like APT in earlier RedHat versions. However, as a longtime user of Debian and Gentoo, I haven't encountered any problems like that except for the ocassional broken package. Its simply not something I think about anymore. Software installation and system updating is just a one-step process for me.
I don't agree with your assesments of Time, et al, but I will agree with you on one thing.
>>>>>>>>>>
That's precisely my point. I see a lot of conservative principles as wrong on face value. I simply have different priorities than most conservatives, which makes my interpretation of various events totally different. For example, when I see someone one Fox talking about ignoring the UN, it annoys me. To me, internationalization is more important than getting the absolute best deal for the US. To somebody who has different priorities, those statements may seem perfectly understandible and self-evident. So what seems like balanced reporting to one side seems horrible biased to the other. There is no point in trying to pretend differently.