There's a repository for that: http://crunchbang.org/forums/viewtopic.php?pid=248917%23p248917 What is most painful though is the old version of libc they are stuck on (2.13), half of all the Humble Bundle games won't work because they were compiled with something newer, so I'm thinking of switching to Mint or Arch this weekend.
You meant Abdulrahman Ali Alharbi doesn't exist? Or that he was never suspected of anything? True he wasn't actually arrested, but his visa was revoked and he's being deported.
The police also water cannoned a number of suspected bombs that turned out to be nothing. When I heard the reports of "other bombs" being water cannoned I knew it was the normal over protection.
Yeah, I realized the wording of those reports was completely clueless. I hardly think the procedures were "over protection", but clearly all that was being done was figuratively poking stuff with a long long stick to see if it would blow up - in an abundance of caution - SOP.
No, I am sure it was discussed thoroughly. I'm not even convinced in my own mind that any of the decisions reached were wrong from the standpoint of Debian's methods and goals. I'm only sure that this has develoiped in (big subjective conclusion) an unfortunate way as regards some of the things that matter a lot to me.
You're only stuck with the earlier version if you don't know how to download and build your own software.
Yeah, I absolutely want to install the most stable distro there is, and then spend my time building my own software from source. NOT. Kind of deafeats the point.
I have, as it happens, built a lot of packages from source, and used add-on repos, but then why do I need Debian stable to do that? Might as well use current Arch, or something else leading edge and adventurous.
Coverage has been one completely bogus claim after another, always from unnamed sources.
Blast from second floor inside building. Oh wait, no it wasn't. Two bombs placed in trash cans. Oh wait, no they weren't. Authorities have found and "blown up" a number of other bombs. Oh wait, no they haven't. A dark skinned suspect has been arrested. Oh wait, there is no such suspect.
Being stuck with Xfce 4.8 is particularly galling since the default desktop for Wheezy is the unutterably awful GNOME 3. Xfce 4.10 will be OVER ONE YEAR OLD when Wheezy is released and it is absolutely crazy not to have 4.10 in Wheezy.
I'll grant you that even Xfce 4.8 is vastly superior to GNOME 3, but it is very unfortunate not to have 4.10, which has some significant enhancements; the one I find most welcome is FINALLY the ability to configure desktop icons for single-click activation.
I "get" the emphasis on stability, but now we'll be stuck with a badly out of date Xfce for a lengthy period until Wheezy is replaced. And I can SORT OF understand the decision to reverse course on what was once the plan for Debian to change the default desktop from GNOME 3 to Xfce (though I still on balance disagree with it and find it regrettable).
It's not so bizarre. It is in scales that people with this sort of battery would actually use. No one in this century will run 74 GW of anything with a battery, and liters are more common for liquids.
The reason it's absurd is because it's a mishmash of units. Come on; volume expressed as cm times cm times micrometer? Ludicrous. Standard practice is to express the volume as m^3 or liter or cm^3. Pick one. Any table of power density will use one of those. Instead this thing is expressed as an outlandish square cuboid in which the thickness dimension is in units which are one ten thousandth the size of the units of the square faces.
As was pointed out to me, the 74 GW/m^3 is a conversional error (oops) and should be 74 MW/m^3, or 74 kW/liter. If the normalized number is difficult for you to relate to because of its size, you could always express it as 74 W/cm^3, which is also normalized.
I'd bet that somebody working with capacitor banks for generating very brief discharges to form a magnetic field to confine hydrogen for fusion would be right at home with the expression as 74 MW/m^3.
I'm afraid your cut and paste came out complete garbage. The number you want to express is 7.4 mW cm^-2 micrometer^-1, which is more conventionally expressed as 74 MW/liter. Slashdot's markup support for compositions is incredibly crude.
"Here we report lithium ion microbatteries having power densities up to 7.4mWcm2m1,which equals or exceeds that of the best supercapacitors, and which is 2,000 times higher than that of other microbatteries." WTF more do you want? you can calculate almost everything from there.
For god's sake, if you're going to quote technical math, can't you at least get it transcribed right? 7.4mWcm2m1 is utter nonsense. I realize for reasons unknown slashdot does not implement even elementary HTML markup like Greek letters, superscript and subscript. Preview shows garbage from cut and paste, so just improvise.
The article says 7.4 mW cm^-2 micrometer^-1, which are pretty bizarre units, but readily convertinle to 74 GW/m^3, or 74 MW/liter. That gives us the power density in meaningful form, and it seems pretty damn impressive to me.
It's hardly an esoteric feature. It is completely fundamental to the highly successful design philosophy.
Running X11 as a separate window under Wayland, in which X apps are second class citizens on the desktop, is hardly going to be accepted as an adequate solution.
Yes, that is arguable. But you would have to explain what you gain by discarding a feature that already works fine, and why that gain is worth the sacrifice.
Exactly. It's not hating the effort. It's not hating the people. It's not really even hating the project's direction per se - not if it could easily be ignored. It's hating that a good, serviceable system with valuable features (GNOME 2, X11) is likely to be REPLACED by an inferior one (GNOME 3, Wayland) lacking important features. Yes, it's still POSSIBLE with open source to forge your own way, but it's hardly practical to spend your effort fixing bad mainstream decisions when you have THINGS TO DO.
I haven't tried it with FreeRDP, but Microsoft's version of RDP supports something called "RemoteApp" which lets you run individual programs with network transparency. Some googling turns up what looks to be a FreeRDP version of that.
That is encouraging, but from your link and from this one, it still seems like a hack - i.e., it's not transparent. You have to jump through hoops evidently. The beauty of X11 is the network transparency. If I've got an ssh open to a remote host, all X11 apps I run on that connection on the remote host automatically appear on my own desktop without any special treatment at all.
It might grow, but there is no assurance that it will; not really even any indication.
Sorry; if this is what is implied by the name, it won't fly. Remote desktop is no substitute whatever for transparently running individual remote GUI programs on your own desktop.
Unless and until Wayland understands this, it is pure garbage.
You're a [expletive] [expletive]. These were innocent people
Who do you think the collateral damage in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan were? Guilty of living in the wrong country? Attending a funeral too near to somebody else's idea of Bad Guys? Unfortunate misakes?
You may find it comforting to know that, so far, GM crops have had no direct effect on human health.
If I were naive enough to trust leaps to conclusions and claims which cannot POSSIBLY be proved, yes, I suppose that statement would comfort me. If you had said "as far as we have yet been able to determine, no effects on human health have so far been traced", which is more a more supportable statement, I wouldn't feel comfortable at all.
Pick and place machines don't cost more to operate in the UK than in China.
Actually, a moment's thought would suggest not. Actually, the electricity to run those machines costs from 0.075 to 0.107 USD $/kWh; in the UK it is 0.2. Wages of the few people you do employ (it clearly can't be zero), most notably in management, are also bound to be higher. You can take it to the bank that the investment in the land to build on to house the machines, as well as the buildings themselves, will also be more in UK. And so on.
If you are really interested in what libertarians think about corporatism and what their policy would be in regard to it if they had power, why don't you, I don't know, like, ASK THEM? THIS also might possibly cause you to re-examine things. Just google "libertarianism corporatism". I can certainly recommend investigating some of the top site hits; it was helpful to me. Libertarianism and CLASSICAL liberalism (not the abortion of liberal socialism as found in most of the West) share so many points, they are practically the same thing.
Hint: you entirely miss the point of libertarianism with your comment. Maybe libertarian policies if implemented would work to bring about what libertarians say they want, or maybe it's an unworkable pipe dream, but it propose REAL solutions to the problems you seem to care about.
Slashdot Mirror
They must mean "no more".
Horse crap. The public would have TARGETED a half dozen people who LATER were determined to be not guilty for INVESTIGATION.
Mod this highly informative!
I wouldn't be too sure about that. There is a lot of backtracking going on over that. "He's going to be deported; oh wait, maybe not".
"Now, it seems that the man is completely innocent of any wrongdoing."
Yeah, I realized the wording of those reports was completely clueless. I hardly think the procedures were "over protection", but clearly all that was being done was figuratively poking stuff with a long long stick to see if it would blow up - in an abundance of caution - SOP.
No, I am sure it was discussed thoroughly. I'm not even convinced in my own mind that any of the decisions reached were wrong from the standpoint of Debian's methods and goals. I'm only sure that this has develoiped in (big subjective conclusion) an unfortunate way as regards some of the things that matter a lot to me.
Yeah, I absolutely want to install the most stable distro there is, and then spend my time building my own software from source. NOT. Kind of deafeats the point.
I have, as it happens, built a lot of packages from source, and used add-on repos, but then why do I need Debian stable to do that? Might as well use current Arch, or something else leading edge and adventurous.
Coverage has been one completely bogus claim after another, always from unnamed sources.
Blast from second floor inside building. Oh wait, no it wasn't.
Two bombs placed in trash cans. Oh wait, no they weren't.
Authorities have found and "blown up" a number of other bombs. Oh wait, no they haven't.
A dark skinned suspect has been arrested. Oh wait, there is no such suspect.
Being stuck with Xfce 4.8 is particularly galling since the default desktop for Wheezy is the unutterably awful GNOME 3. Xfce 4.10 will be OVER ONE YEAR OLD when Wheezy is released and it is absolutely crazy not to have 4.10 in Wheezy.
I'll grant you that even Xfce 4.8 is vastly superior to GNOME 3, but it is very unfortunate not to have 4.10, which has some significant enhancements; the one I find most welcome is FINALLY the ability to configure desktop icons for single-click activation.
I "get" the emphasis on stability, but now we'll be stuck with a badly out of date Xfce for a lengthy period until Wheezy is replaced. And I can SORT OF understand the decision to reverse course on what was once the plan for Debian to change the default desktop from GNOME 3 to Xfce (though I still on balance disagree with it and find it regrettable).
Correction noted in the original thread.
The reason it's absurd is because it's a mishmash of units. Come on; volume expressed as cm times cm times micrometer? Ludicrous. Standard practice is to express the volume as m^3 or liter or cm^3. Pick one. Any table of power density will use one of those. Instead this thing is expressed as an outlandish square cuboid in which the thickness dimension is in units which are one ten thousandth the size of the units of the square faces.
As was pointed out to me, the 74 GW/m^3 is a conversional error (oops) and should be 74 MW/m^3, or 74 kW/liter. If the normalized number is difficult for you to relate to because of its size, you could always express it as 74 W/cm^3, which is also normalized.
I'd bet that somebody working with capacitor banks for generating very brief discharges to form a magnetic field to confine hydrogen for fusion would be right at home with the expression as 74 MW/m^3.
7.4 mW//cm/cm/micrometer = 740 mW/m/cm/micrometer = 74 k mW/m/m/micrometer = 74 G mW/m/m/m = 74 M W/m/m/m
You are correct, sir. Thank you. My calculator calculated perfectly, but I did not remember to handle the unit change from mW to W.
I can assure you those of us with indifferent or even ridiculous asses also wear jeans.
I'm afraid your cut and paste came out complete garbage. The number you want to express is 7.4 mW cm^-2 micrometer^-1, which is more conventionally expressed as 74 MW/liter. Slashdot's markup support for compositions is incredibly crude.
For god's sake, if you're going to quote technical math, can't you at least get it transcribed right? 7.4mWcm2m1 is utter nonsense. I realize for reasons unknown slashdot does not implement even elementary HTML markup like Greek letters, superscript and subscript. Preview shows garbage from cut and paste, so just improvise.
The article says 7.4 mW cm^-2 micrometer^-1, which are pretty bizarre units, but readily convertinle to 74 GW/m^3, or 74 MW/liter. That gives us the power density in meaningful form, and it seems pretty damn impressive to me.
So we know the perp is a million years old. Should be easy to find.
Psssst. Not only are letters outdated; so is email and so are voice phone calls. Nobody uses email and voice any more; it's all text messaging.
It's hardly an esoteric feature. It is completely fundamental to the highly successful design philosophy.
Running X11 as a separate window under Wayland, in which X apps are second class citizens on the desktop, is hardly going to be accepted as an adequate solution.
Yes, that is arguable. But you would have to explain what you gain by discarding a feature that already works fine, and why that gain is worth the sacrifice.
Exactly. It's not hating the effort. It's not hating the people. It's not really even hating the project's direction per se - not if it could easily be ignored. It's hating that a good, serviceable system with valuable features (GNOME 2, X11) is likely to be REPLACED by an inferior one (GNOME 3, Wayland) lacking important features. Yes, it's still POSSIBLE with open source to forge your own way, but it's hardly practical to spend your effort fixing bad mainstream decisions when you have THINGS TO DO.
That is encouraging, but from your link and from this one, it still seems like a hack - i.e., it's not transparent. You have to jump through hoops evidently. The beauty of X11 is the network transparency. If I've got an ssh open to a remote host, all X11 apps I run on that connection on the remote host automatically appear on my own desktop without any special treatment at all.
It might grow, but there is no assurance that it will; not really even any indication.
Sorry; if this is what is implied by the name, it won't fly. Remote desktop is no substitute whatever for transparently running individual remote GUI programs on your own desktop.
Unless and until Wayland understands this, it is pure garbage.
If our anonymous coward had a single clue, he would know that ssh is the preferred way to forward X11 SECURELY.
Who do you think the collateral damage in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan were? Guilty of living in the wrong country? Attending a funeral too near to somebody else's idea of Bad Guys? Unfortunate misakes?
If I were naive enough to trust leaps to conclusions and claims which cannot POSSIBLY be proved, yes, I suppose that statement would comfort me. If you had said "as far as we have yet been able to determine, no effects on human health have so far been traced", which is more a more supportable statement, I wouldn't feel comfortable at all.
Actually, a moment's thought would suggest not. Actually, the electricity to run those machines costs from 0.075 to 0.107 USD $/kWh; in the UK it is 0.2. Wages of the few people you do employ (it clearly can't be zero), most notably in management, are also bound to be higher. You can take it to the bank that the investment in the land to build on to house the machines, as well as the buildings themselves, will also be more in UK. And so on.
If you are really interested in what libertarians think about corporatism and what their policy would be in regard to it if they had power, why don't you, I don't know, like, ASK THEM? THIS also might possibly cause you to re-examine things. Just google "libertarianism corporatism". I can certainly recommend investigating some of the top site hits; it was helpful to me. Libertarianism and CLASSICAL liberalism (not the abortion of liberal socialism as found in most of the West) share so many points, they are practically the same thing.
Hint: you entirely miss the point of libertarianism with your comment. Maybe libertarian policies if implemented would work to bring about what libertarians say they want, or maybe it's an unworkable pipe dream, but it propose REAL solutions to the problems you seem to care about.