and that you should have enjoyed your life and family instead.
Which is far easier to do if you're not starving and homeless. And for that you need money.
And for that you need all this "work" bullshit you think is so unimportant.
Work is not important for its own sake. It's important because it provides the resources you need to do exactly what you advised: Enjoy your life and family.
I agree. GrandCentral was a killer service. Since becoming Google Voice, every now and then I go to adjust a setting, only to find that the setting no longer even exists.
Google seems to be pissing me off on a pretty regular basis lately.
They fucked up GrandCentral, took away Browser Sync, and based on the article description, it looks like they're axing 2 or 3 features this time around that I use regularly.
Also, while wget can be used on CL, downloading files from the internet is a lot easier with a full on browser.
No, the actual easy way to do this is to find the file you want using the browser on your local workstation, right click, copy link, switch to remote terminal window, type "wget " and hit shift-insert.
Running a full-on browser via x over ssh isn't really going to give you screaming fast performance. I can't think of a situation where I'd even be tempted to do it.
While the only argument every kneejerker gives is,"If you can't make money on media, no one would ever write a book again!
It's not a knee jerk argument, it's a perfectly valid one.
Money makes the world go 'round. You don't have to like that fact, but it is the reality. All of the utopian arguments in favor of giving everything away for free fall flat on their face when you factor in the fact that new things would stop being created. It wouldn't advance civilization, it would bring progress to a grinding halt.
There are a very few idealists who would work hard simply "for the betterment of humanity". But only a very few. Thing is they tend to gravitate towards each other, and surround themselves with like minded people, creating a delusion that their numbers are significant enough to accomplish much.
It's actually an interesting point. Freedom of software use, and the ownership and ability to access and modify data and software which we purchase, is vital to protecting private data.
Don't confuse convenient with vital. Sure, being able to modify your software makes many things easier, but that is not the same as those things being impossible if the software is closed. While I make extensive use of open source software, both personally and professionally, I've also made extensive use of proprietary software as well. I can think of a select few situations where having some source code would have made a data migration easier, but none where the closed nature of software put data in any realistic danger of being lost.
As far as the Trusted Computing architecture and it's use in DRM, I'm not sure how that's really relevant. In order to have DRM locked data, I have to go out and purchase that data from someone else. Nobody is sneaking onto my PC and adding DRM to any data that I created.
Now, I despise DRM as much as anyone, but let's be realistic. It's primary use is for the owners of a piece of property to control the manner in which it is used. I may not like those restrictions, and I may even perceive that they inconvenience me, but they don't violate my "rights" in the slightest. The owner of something SHOULD have the right to set the terms under which others may use it.
Where the bulk of RMS's arguments fall flat on their face is in the extremes he tries to take them to. He takes an inconvenience and raises it to the level of a violation of rights. He takes opposing viewpoints and raises them to the level of "immoral".
He portrays himself as being a defender of freedom, but an objective analysis of his views reveals otherwise. Most of his views, if applied in the real world, would serve to restrict freedom as much, if not more, than they would promote it. The only "freedom" he really believes in is the freedom to agree with him.
What happened to the whole "innocent until proven guilty"?!
That's something that academic types talk about amongst themselves.
In the real world guilt/innocence is mostly determined by the amount of cash you can raise to hire the right lawyer. (Hint: A low cost lawyer is a waste of money, and a court appointed lawyer will frequently do you more harm than good.)
It's not so much a matter of being wrong (although he very often is). It's more the fact that even when he's got a good point, he still can't put together a coherent, well thought out argument and instead just comes across as an extremist nutjob (most likely because that's exactly what he it).
This importance of software freedom could be the key to preserving the other freedoms you mention, without it the others fall.
Wait. What?
So you're saying, and correct me if I'm wrong here, that if a company like Microsoft is allowed to sell or distribute software without releasing the source code, it will inevitably lead to the disappearance of all other freedoms?
It's my data, it's up to me to archive it. The "gain" for me is that I have access to my data independent from any other individual or corporation. Let's face it, tech companies come and go.
Call me a risk taker, but I feel reasonably confident that Google is probably going to be around for at least another year or two.
And backing up your email is just as simple whether you use a desktop client or a web app.
Well, AMD is looking good too, with currently shipping Fusion parts for laptops all being Evergreen or Northern Islands, both supported by the open source xorg Radeon driver,
Currently typing this on an el-cheapo laptop with a low-end AMD processor and graphics. Needed a replacement quickly and on a tight budget when my good laptop came to a very sad and undignified end.
After playing with several linux distros on this thing, I've found that the x.org drivers run absolutely great, and in fact run quite a bit better than the Catalyst drivers.
(Now if I could just find working drivers for the RTL8188 wifi chip in here, it might actually turn out to be a decent backup laptop.)
If you're spending $400 a month on health care, you might want to look into correcting whatever it is that has your health in such a pathetic state!
You're paying per person what it costs me to insure a family of 4. (And, yes, it's a good plan. Low deductible, low copay, no unreasonable restrictions, etc...)
They think it's a bargain because they are getting more hours, meanwhile less is getting done and it's getting done in the worst possible way.
It seems that particular idiotic management mentality will never die.
I had a position a while back where I took over for someone who had the companies entire infrastructure thoroughly messed up. He meant well, just didn't have the slightest clue what he was doing. It took me about 2 weeks to put things in order and automate a large number of tasks. At that point, I could get my job done easily in 4 to 6 hours a day.
When it came time for my 6 month review, it was mediocre at best, without the pay increase that I had been expecting. My predecessor was held up as a shining example of what they were looking for, since he was hard at work all day, and frequently stayed 2 or 3 hours late in the evening. No mention was made of the fact that their systems were now running smoothly and that the only reason the guy put in so many hours was that it took him that long to come up with even band-aid solutions.
Needless to say, I moved on to a much better environment shortly thereafter.
This is the same mentality that prevents telecommuting from being offered even when it would be a great deal for all parties. It's all about being able to "see" you work, with no regard given to the quality of the product of that work.
I'm old, too. I remember the days when "going online" meant dialing up a local BBS. Any software you could find that was free was almost universally crappy. Then there was limited functionality shareware, some good, some crappy. Beyond that you went to the store and forked over big bucks for commercial products.
Today I can choose from a choice of multiple free operating systems, and even on Windows I can meet all my needs without having to spend a dime on additional software.
The one thing that hasn't changed is that free games still suck.
I have a hard time seeing the overall trend here as being anything other than towards openness. Sure, the big vendors are trying new things to get you to buy their stuff, but that's nothing new. It's just what businesses do.
Slashdot Mirror
and that you should have enjoyed your life and family instead.
Which is far easier to do if you're not starving and homeless. And for that you need money.
And for that you need all this "work" bullshit you think is so unimportant.
Work is not important for its own sake. It's important because it provides the resources you need to do exactly what you advised: Enjoy your life and family.
1) IMAP has push.
Well, technically, yes.
But the way it's implemented causes it to be a battery hog on mobile devices.
I agree. GrandCentral was a killer service. Since becoming Google Voice, every now and then I go to adjust a setting, only to find that the setting no longer even exists.
Google seems to be pissing me off on a pretty regular basis lately.
They fucked up GrandCentral, took away Browser Sync, and based on the article description, it looks like they're axing 2 or 3 features this time around that I use regularly.
Bastards.
You are misusing the gun.
You keep saying that over and over. Do you have the slightest clue how ridiculous you sound?
Repetition does not make you any less wrong.
And how many people have a gigabit connection to their VPS host?
Also, while wget can be used on CL, downloading files from the internet is a lot easier with a full on browser.
No, the actual easy way to do this is to find the file you want using the browser on your local workstation, right click, copy link, switch to remote terminal window, type "wget " and hit shift-insert.
Running a full-on browser via x over ssh isn't really going to give you screaming fast performance. I can't think of a situation where I'd even be tempted to do it.
While the only argument every kneejerker gives is,"If you can't make money on media, no one would ever write a book again!
It's not a knee jerk argument, it's a perfectly valid one.
Money makes the world go 'round. You don't have to like that fact, but it is the reality. All of the utopian arguments in favor of giving everything away for free fall flat on their face when you factor in the fact that new things would stop being created. It wouldn't advance civilization, it would bring progress to a grinding halt.
There are a very few idealists who would work hard simply "for the betterment of humanity". But only a very few. Thing is they tend to gravitate towards each other, and surround themselves with like minded people, creating a delusion that their numbers are significant enough to accomplish much.
Yeah, that would be a little late. It's been around for a very long time now.
http://www.mcafee.com/us/products/virusscan-enterprise-for-linux.aspx
It's actually an interesting point. Freedom of software use, and the ownership and ability to access and modify data and software which we purchase, is vital to protecting private data.
Don't confuse convenient with vital. Sure, being able to modify your software makes many things easier, but that is not the same as those things being impossible if the software is closed. While I make extensive use of open source software, both personally and professionally, I've also made extensive use of proprietary software as well. I can think of a select few situations where having some source code would have made a data migration easier, but none where the closed nature of software put data in any realistic danger of being lost.
As far as the Trusted Computing architecture and it's use in DRM, I'm not sure how that's really relevant. In order to have DRM locked data, I have to go out and purchase that data from someone else. Nobody is sneaking onto my PC and adding DRM to any data that I created.
Now, I despise DRM as much as anyone, but let's be realistic. It's primary use is for the owners of a piece of property to control the manner in which it is used. I may not like those restrictions, and I may even perceive that they inconvenience me, but they don't violate my "rights" in the slightest. The owner of something SHOULD have the right to set the terms under which others may use it.
Where the bulk of RMS's arguments fall flat on their face is in the extremes he tries to take them to. He takes an inconvenience and raises it to the level of a violation of rights. He takes opposing viewpoints and raises them to the level of "immoral".
He portrays himself as being a defender of freedom, but an objective analysis of his views reveals otherwise. Most of his views, if applied in the real world, would serve to restrict freedom as much, if not more, than they would promote it. The only "freedom" he really believes in is the freedom to agree with him.
What happened to the whole "innocent until proven guilty"?!
That's something that academic types talk about amongst themselves.
In the real world guilt/innocence is mostly determined by the amount of cash you can raise to hire the right lawyer. (Hint: A low cost lawyer is a waste of money, and a court appointed lawyer will frequently do you more harm than good.)
Well, first you have to actually get INTO prison. That's the easy part. Get creative.
Once your there, assaulting a few of the guards ought to buy you some time in solitary.
It's not so much a matter of being wrong (although he very often is). It's more the fact that even when he's got a good point, he still can't put together a coherent, well thought out argument and instead just comes across as an extremist nutjob (most likely because that's exactly what he it).
The Larry, Moe and Curly of Internet head cases. And each week they travel the world to interview other Internet head cases
So, clearly RMS would be the first guest?
The damage it is doing to the McAfee brand must be significant.
Surely it can't compete with the damage to the brand that's been caused by the software, can it?
founder of awful antivirus
Actually, it used to be really good antivirus software.
Of course, the dominant PC operating system at that time was MS-DOS 3.3, but still, it used to be pretty good.
No, his big mouth is a liability for the open-source community.
100% agreed.
Simply having his name attached to something decreases its credibility to almost nil.
This importance of software freedom could be the key to preserving the other freedoms you mention, without it the others fall.
Wait. What?
So you're saying, and correct me if I'm wrong here, that if a company like Microsoft is allowed to sell or distribute software without releasing the source code, it will inevitably lead to the disappearance of all other freedoms?
'Cause it sure sounds like you're saying that.
It's my data, it's up to me to archive it. The "gain" for me is that I have access to my data independent from any other individual or corporation. Let's face it, tech companies come and go.
Call me a risk taker, but I feel reasonably confident that Google is probably going to be around for at least another year or two.
And backing up your email is just as simple whether you use a desktop client or a web app.
Although leaving the mail on the server negates the privacy advantage you mentioned. As does a subpoena.
Well, AMD is looking good too, with currently shipping Fusion parts for laptops all being Evergreen or Northern Islands, both supported by the open source xorg Radeon driver,
Currently typing this on an el-cheapo laptop with a low-end AMD processor and graphics. Needed a replacement quickly and on a tight budget when my good laptop came to a very sad and undignified end.
After playing with several linux distros on this thing, I've found that the x.org drivers run absolutely great, and in fact run quite a bit better than the Catalyst drivers.
(Now if I could just find working drivers for the RTL8188 wifi chip in here, it might actually turn out to be a decent backup laptop.)
If you're spending $400 a month on health care, you might want to look into correcting whatever it is that has your health in such a pathetic state!
You're paying per person what it costs me to insure a family of 4. (And, yes, it's a good plan. Low deductible, low copay, no unreasonable restrictions, etc...)
They think it's a bargain because they are getting more hours, meanwhile less is getting done and it's getting done in the worst possible way.
It seems that particular idiotic management mentality will never die.
I had a position a while back where I took over for someone who had the companies entire infrastructure thoroughly messed up. He meant well, just didn't have the slightest clue what he was doing. It took me about 2 weeks to put things in order and automate a large number of tasks. At that point, I could get my job done easily in 4 to 6 hours a day.
When it came time for my 6 month review, it was mediocre at best, without the pay increase that I had been expecting. My predecessor was held up as a shining example of what they were looking for, since he was hard at work all day, and frequently stayed 2 or 3 hours late in the evening. No mention was made of the fact that their systems were now running smoothly and that the only reason the guy put in so many hours was that it took him that long to come up with even band-aid solutions.
Needless to say, I moved on to a much better environment shortly thereafter.
This is the same mentality that prevents telecommuting from being offered even when it would be a great deal for all parties. It's all about being able to "see" you work, with no regard given to the quality of the product of that work.
Where's the entertainment value in that?
I'm old, too. I remember the days when "going online" meant dialing up a local BBS. Any software you could find that was free was almost universally crappy. Then there was limited functionality shareware, some good, some crappy. Beyond that you went to the store and forked over big bucks for commercial products.
Today I can choose from a choice of multiple free operating systems, and even on Windows I can meet all my needs without having to spend a dime on additional software.
The one thing that hasn't changed is that free games still suck.
I have a hard time seeing the overall trend here as being anything other than towards openness. Sure, the big vendors are trying new things to get you to buy their stuff, but that's nothing new. It's just what businesses do.
Unified and shitty are not mutually exclusive