Isn't that exactly what he said? From TFS: "Its value is uncertain, its legal status is unclear, and it could easily become valueless if users lose faith."
Yeah, the dollar is toast, but what about Bitcoins?
Since all States are doomed to failure, their currency will follow. When was the last time that Roman coins were used as legal tender?
You can't have legal tender without a government to declare it such. But I'm pretty sure there are people who'd happily accept Roman coins for payment, with a value based on their rarity and gold and silver content (which was massively debased by the government as the Empire decayed).
This is one area that government can provide some stability against inflation and outright scams.
Yes, they could, in theory, in a magical fantasy world run by benevolent overlords. But, in the real world, the US dollar has lost approximately 99% of its value since the Fed was founded and no longer has any value beyond the US government's promise to tax future generations to support it.
Economists who don't tell banks and governments what they want to hear don't have jobs for long. So, obviously, most of what they publically spout is complete nonsense.
There are editorials going back more than a century saying the exact same things you are saying. It's all going to hell, blah blah blah.
And they were right. A century ago we were heading into WWI, WWII and the Cold War under perpetual threat of nuclear destruction, where we avoided destroying life on Earth as much by luck as intelligence.
No, the problem with RT is that it's a tablet with no apps.
If someone wants a tablet, they can buy an iPad or Android. There's no reason to buy one that runs Windows but won't run Windows apps.
Only a ReTard could ever have imagined it would be a good idea. Microsoft just seem to think that people buy Windows PCs because they love Windows, and not because they've got some crusty old Windows programs they want to run.
But they're not incorrectly working 80% of the time, they're incorrectly working once, fixed, and then they work for the rest of the products life.
So they magically fix themselves?
If I buy something, I want it to work out of the box. If it didn't work out of the box 80% of the time, I'd call it 'unreliable'. I wouldn't care whether I can download some program from the Internet to fix it, you'd already have lost me as a customer.
As far as I can see, the whole push for Metro was to try to convince people to develop apps for Windows phones, becuase there was no point in developing for a tiny market like that. Now, they've screwed their desktop users to try to get into the tablet and phone market, and they're dumping tablets.
I think the poster I was replying to is under the impression that, because they don't see Red Hat on many desktops, it's an irrelevant distro. Ubuntu is on many desktops, but I don't believe it's making a billion plus in revenues, because that's not where the Linux revenues are.
Good for you. Twice I've had Ubuntu just crash in the middle of an upgrade, leaving it in who knows what state. They remove software you've been using for years, so anything on the system relying on it no longer works, and other software requires database changes which may or may not fully work.
Besides which, installing the new version and then copying over any modified configuration is often much faster than the hours and hours an in-place upgrade requires. That's OK if you can leave it unattended overnight, but then you get up at 8am and see it crashed and have to try to fix it before you go to work.
If you're going to have to switch to an Ubuntu sub-distro in order to get the configuration you want, why not just go the whole hog and switch to a non-Ubuntu distro?
Try to do a CTRL-F search with a paper book. Have fun with that.
That's the one thing I really miss with paper books. I was looking for the source of an quote recently, which I'm sure I read in one of the author's books on my shelf in the last year, but I didn't want to have to hunt through a thousand pages or more to find it.
C'mon RedHat/CentOS recommends you don't do an in-place upgrade.
Uh, what? I've been doing in-place upgrades on my CentOS machine since 2008.
Sure, you can't do major version upgrades in place, but minor version upgrades are painless. Ubuntu tries to allow you to do major upgrades in place, but after a year or two you have to reinstall to clear out the crud.
what's an example of a profitable linux distro company?
Red Hat are profitable, aren't they?
Canonical could have built a 'just works' Linux distro that people would have paid for, but they felt the need to go all Jobs on their users' asses instead. So most moved to Mint. Guess they'll have to move to the Debian version of Mint when Ubuntu goes away.
Amazon support this if the publisher lets them: buy a paper book from them and you can get the e-book free, or for a discounted price (I think it has to be discounted to $2.99 or less).
BTW, best-selling authors often get less per book sold than mid-tier authors. Most titles don't "earn out" their advance, so the author is making more per book than the per-book royalty (of course, that's far less total money).
Real best-selling authors (e.g. the Stephen Kings of the world, not someone who just got on the NYT list for a week) get much better deals than the crappy ones mid-listers can negotiate.
When are Congressmen going to publicly admit that this rogue agency is a greater danger to national security, in any meaningful sense of the term, than Al Quaeda ever was?
Never, given they just discovered that the NSA has a list of all the pr0n sites they've visited. Do you think there's any politician in DC who has no skeletons in the cupboard for the NSA to exploit?
This is why you don't create a secret police agency. Once they have a file on everyone, no-one can stop them.
Slashdot Mirror
Isn't that exactly what he said? From TFS: "Its value is uncertain, its legal status is unclear, and it could easily become valueless if users lose faith."
Yeah, the dollar is toast, but what about Bitcoins?
Since all States are doomed to failure, their currency will follow. When was the last time that Roman coins were used as legal tender?
You can't have legal tender without a government to declare it such. But I'm pretty sure there are people who'd happily accept Roman coins for payment, with a value based on their rarity and gold and silver content (which was massively debased by the government as the Empire decayed).
This is one area that government can provide some stability against inflation and outright scams.
Yes, they could, in theory, in a magical fantasy world run by benevolent overlords. But, in the real world, the US dollar has lost approximately 99% of its value since the Fed was founded and no longer has any value beyond the US government's promise to tax future generations to support it.
Economists who don't tell banks and governments what they want to hear don't have jobs for long. So, obviously, most of what they publically spout is complete nonsense.
Of course Tesla is getting lots of press, it's because electric cars are new.
No, electric cars will soon be two hundred years old. They predate the internal combustion engine by decades.
People (especially Americans) do not like change, they assume that the old way is the best way.
So why did these EVIL CHANGE-HATING AMERICANS dump their electric cars so fast when the internal combustion engine came along in the 19th century?
I can't understand how some one like you would want to build a computer. Your complaints would put legos or megablocks out of business.
I've built four computers for my own use in the last four years. They all worked out of the box, and are all still working.
Why shouldn't I expect a new computer built from new parts to just work?
There are editorials going back more than a century saying the exact same things you are saying. It's all going to hell, blah blah blah.
And they were right. A century ago we were heading into WWI, WWII and the Cold War under perpetual threat of nuclear destruction, where we avoided destroying life on Earth as much by luck as intelligence.
No, the problem with RT is that it's a tablet with no apps.
If someone wants a tablet, they can buy an iPad or Android. There's no reason to buy one that runs Windows but won't run Windows apps.
Only a ReTard could ever have imagined it would be a good idea. Microsoft just seem to think that people buy Windows PCs because they love Windows, and not because they've got some crusty old Windows programs they want to run.
But they're not incorrectly working 80% of the time, they're incorrectly working once, fixed, and then they work for the rest of the products life.
So they magically fix themselves?
If I buy something, I want it to work out of the box. If it didn't work out of the box 80% of the time, I'd call it 'unreliable'. I wouldn't care whether I can download some program from the Internet to fix it, you'd already have lost me as a customer.
And Metro sucks on anything other than a phone.
As far as I can see, the whole push for Metro was to try to convince people to develop apps for Windows phones, becuase there was no point in developing for a tiny market like that. Now, they've screwed their desktop users to try to get into the tablet and phone market, and they're dumping tablets.
I built over 50 computers with OCZ SSDs and about 40 of them had to be flashed to the latest firmware before they operated correctly.
In some parts of the universe, we call not working correctly 80% of the time 'unreliable'.
Even if it's fixed, that kind of reputation hangs around for a long time.
I think the poster I was replying to is under the impression that, because they don't see Red Hat on many desktops, it's an irrelevant distro. Ubuntu is on many desktops, but I don't believe it's making a billion plus in revenues, because that's not where the Linux revenues are.
Good for you. Twice I've had Ubuntu just crash in the middle of an upgrade, leaving it in who knows what state. They remove software you've been using for years, so anything on the system relying on it no longer works, and other software requires database changes which may or may not fully work.
Besides which, installing the new version and then copying over any modified configuration is often much faster than the hours and hours an in-place upgrade requires. That's OK if you can leave it unattended overnight, but then you get up at 8am and see it crashed and have to try to fix it before you go to work.
anyway, use Samba. it sucks less than NFS, and I speak as LONG time unix admin. I'm older than Unix.
Because there are absolutely no issues with Samba files not being quite like a local filesystem.
If you're going to have to switch to an Ubuntu sub-distro in order to get the configuration you want, why not just go the whole hog and switch to a non-Ubuntu distro?
Try to do a CTRL-F search with a paper book. Have fun with that.
That's the one thing I really miss with paper books. I was looking for the source of an quote recently, which I'm sure I read in one of the author's books on my shelf in the last year, but I didn't want to have to hunt through a thousand pages or more to find it.
C'mon RedHat/CentOS recommends you don't do an in-place upgrade.
Uh, what? I've been doing in-place upgrades on my CentOS machine since 2008.
Sure, you can't do major version upgrades in place, but minor version upgrades are painless. Ubuntu tries to allow you to do major upgrades in place, but after a year or two you have to reinstall to clear out the crud.
what's an example of a profitable linux distro company?
Red Hat are profitable, aren't they?
Canonical could have built a 'just works' Linux distro that people would have paid for, but they felt the need to go all Jobs on their users' asses instead. So most moved to Mint. Guess they'll have to move to the Debian version of Mint when Ubuntu goes away.
But I really feel the community drop-off in ubuntu, compared to a couple of years ago. And that's pretty important. They're going the way of Red Hat.
I'm betting Canonical wish they were going the way of Red Hat, with a billion plus of revenue.
Ubuntu seems to be trying to lock users in with many of its recent changes, but has just succeeded in pushing users away.
Amazon support this if the publisher lets them: buy a paper book from them and you can get the e-book free, or for a discounted price (I think it has to be discounted to $2.99 or less).
BTW, best-selling authors often get less per book sold than mid-tier authors. Most titles don't "earn out" their advance, so the author is making more per book than the per-book royalty (of course, that's far less total money).
Real best-selling authors (e.g. the Stephen Kings of the world, not someone who just got on the NYT list for a week) get much better deals than the crappy ones mid-listers can negotiate.
Actually, many trade-published e-books cost more than the paper book, not less.
When are Congressmen going to publicly admit that this rogue agency is a greater danger to national security, in any meaningful sense of the term, than Al Quaeda ever was?
Never, given they just discovered that the NSA has a list of all the pr0n sites they've visited. Do you think there's any politician in DC who has no skeletons in the cupboard for the NSA to exploit?
This is why you don't create a secret police agency. Once they have a file on everyone, no-one can stop them.
How about not "vulnerable" but having sent exactly 1 spam detected message? That DEMONSTRATES the vulnerability and is evidence.
I get plenty of 'detected' emails in my spam folder that are not spam. Who's going to decide what is and what isn't?