and for those of you who couldn't actually tell, i missed the obligatory sarcasm disclaimer. but seriously, you people can be so screwed up some times. you have no problems with 'majority rule,' as long as you happen to belong to that particular majority. i swear though, they do one thing that pisses people off, and suddenly they feel that the minority should be in charge, for just this special occasion.
Indeed. my idea of a morally acceptable lifestyle is more akin to the likes of Ed Gein and Jeffrey Dahmer. But what the hell does *my* opinion mean against this "so-called moral majority"?
For what it's worth, I do not believe that Rick Santorum is necessarily a homophobe. Think about it for a moment. The current taboos on incest are based on (discarding religious taboos) what? That's right. The high rate of birth defects resulting from incest.
Now, if anal sex is always ok, then what is the problem with anal sex between immediate family members? Technically, nothing.
No, I'm not a fan of Santorum. But you, sir, are a troll. How can Mr. Santorum condone anal sex between siblings, and condemn procreative sex at the same time? If the gay rights movement is correct, then anal sex is ok. If it is ok between perfect strangers, then why not the same for immediate relatives?
And if it is ok between immediate relatives, then is there really a reason that procreative sex is not also ok (given this world that supports the killing of unborn children)? After all, can we not do anything we wish to do without any consequences?
Well we can, according to a great many "experts" in the field of human sexuality. So which is worse:
Condemning homosexual acts between strangers, or condemning heterosexual acts between siblings (including anal sex acts between them)? If I can have anal sex with a stranger, why not with my sister?
Opponents will (of course) remind me of the high rate of birth defects that accompanies incestual deeds. I have already pointed this out, though: Since abortion is so widely supported, it must be acceptable. And if abortion is acceptable and anal sex is acceptable, then there is *no* reason that we should not be having sex with our family members.
Rick is right in that it is tantamount to promoting incest. Bigamy? I don't understand how. But incest? Yeah, I understand that. And for somebody who pretends to be as smart as you are, I would have hoped that you could figure this out on your own.
That said, I think we have a civic duty to uncover the email addresses of the politicians who passed this bill, and subscribe them to many, many mailing lists for every topic under the sun. Perhaps they will feel differently about spam when they get more of it.
I joined the project as a businessman, like Dave Cinege, hoping to make some money. Well, to my credit, I didn't expect somebody to come around with $100,000 for me, but nevertheless, I was deeply offended when people told me that I didn't have the authority to change policy on bug reports (among other things). I got involved in a flame war on the gentoo-core mailing list, and was summarily dismissed from my status as a gentoo developer.
After a night of crying alone, I decided to write a 17 point document justifying my forking of gentoo, to give them what-for. Just to meet the 17 point requirement, I added not less than FOUR sections talking about who I am, where I came from, and what upsets me. I know people like to hear lots of whining.
Long story short, I'm tired of not being in charge. I'm tired of being told that I can't do whatever I want on somebody else's baby. I hope the world sees that I want to take Gentoo in the "right" direction though, and completely disregard my above whining. Thanks for reading the short version. Now go waste some time and read the long version, too.
-- END --
For those of you with any doubts, I am NOT Zack. Another Linux distribution can be good or bad, depending on how you look at it. Mandrake's rallying cry isn't "wwwaaaaahhhh!!! Redhat is fucked up!" Lindows was based on Debian (as have many other distributions) but it didn't get started by some pissed-off debian maintainer who got fed up because he wasn't allowed to make decisions that weren't his.
There's plenty of space in the pool for another player, though; if there's nothing like gentoo available for all those obscure platforms, Zack is more than welcome to make something like it.
My personal opinion, however, is that he's yet another whiny, embittered open source developer.
No, but while the other projects i run are seperated from the 'main' application; they are tools to support it. as such, they are inconsequential, unless you happen to run that one project. if you *do* run that one project, then more will be avaialable to you. It's quite simple.:)
Since when does six months of labour constitute a "life's work?" Hell, if I thought the last six months of my labours constituted my "life's work," I would be pretty pissed off, too. That said, Mr. Cinege will be getting no sympathy from me. I run at least one GPLed project, and I don't run it hoping and dreaming that somebody will come around and give me $100,000 for it.
How much more do I have to say before it becomes obvious that expecting this (and "punishing" us by not releasing what you *have* done for another developer to persue) is about the least mature thing I have seen from any developer *ever*?
If this is how you approach life, it's no wonder people are in no hurry to give you $100,000, guy. But all that aside, what entitles you to $100,000, when so many more competent and qualified developers go unpaid? what makes you so much better than they are, Mr. Cinege?
Mod me a troll if you must. Whether you want to admit it or not, "Dave" is being as unreasonable as anybody I have ever seen before. That sort of logic will not get you far in the business world when you want to put food on the table and pay the rent. There's nothing more to say.
Let's put this in perspective here. I work for a large retailer that grosses $60,000 per day or more (per store, not company-wide). How much of this money do I make in this same day? typically between $28 and $40. That's about 0.25% (give or take) of the gross revenues, for those of you not mathematically inclined. To put this in perspective, they're grossing about 50 times as much as I am, per dollar earned.
Granted, the record labels do not have the recurring expense of having to continually refill stock, while my store does, but nevertheless; Record Labels are small fish in the big pond of economics. Sure, they may be making out like bandits as far as this is concerned, but in the grand scheme of things, not many people invest in record labels today, because they just don't make as much money as other industries do.
"Hi, we don't like having to compete with these guys. Could you please help us destroy our competition? If you do this, competition between the existing installations will improve! Really!"
I (for one) am not a spammer, but that does not mean I want some technically savvy idiot coming along and digging for my personal information, even if he is just going to give it to the government.
Being slightly intoxicated, I can't pretend to understand most of what you said; apart from going AWOL. This is important; I do not know how Britain handles AWOL soldiers in wartime, but if you join the United States Army and go AWOL in time of war, you may be shot and killed on sight by the US Army. Don't believe me? Go sign up, there's a form you have to fill out that gives them permission to do this.
You go away in time of war, you won't get any medals. You might even not come home alive.
in the meantime, the users (who greatly outnumber the developers) are the ones who decide whether or not to *use* flash content.
i can hardly believe that you choose to extol flash for its built in DRM abilities, which (if you think about it) don't work.
Anybody can take a screenshot of the window whenever they want to, and making surfing your website difficult is going to affect you, more than anybody else. It irritates your users, who decide to stop looking at it. This (obviously) means fewer banner impressions for you, and makes it more difficult to bring in a profit.
who in their right mind deliberately and knowingly alienates a valid part of their potential client pool, just so that their images won't be used elsewhere?
Hah. if france deployed nuclear weapons, what would the world think? have you considered that there is a whole world outside of france? Who struck first does not matter- Well, it does, but it's a seperate offense, and would be dealt with. On the other hand, for any country to launch nuclear weapons is going to ensure that country's total annihilation, regardless of "who started it." not withstanding. This is why you will not see North Korea launching an attack on the USA with nuclear weapons. Yeah, they have them. Are they going to use them? Pigs will fly.
I don't give a damn about the economy. I belong to a minority of people who believes it is more important to live with good ethics and morals than it is to live with lots of money.
I really do believe that Bush has demonstrated that he is totally devoid of both, and should be impeached.
Addressing the situation is long past due, but could have been done via other means (i.e., a more surgical strike designed to capture Hussein). Our government has done assassinations for a long time now, the year 2003 does not seem like it should be any different.
Don't be such a pussy. When they enlisted, it was under the realisation that they may be deployed in wartime. If they are in Iraq, then it is because either they wanted to be there, or they thought it was an acceptable risk to take for the benefits they received by joining the army. You can't expect to volunteer for 6-8 years of service, and then complain when you actually have to WORK for your benefits.
And while I'm at the risk of losing karma, it's worth mentioning that I believe that when we're through with Fraq, we should invade France and divide it evenly between its immediate neighbors. I'm beginning to grow weary of Chirac's incessant whining. Now, it may be a little bit premature to assume that we'll win, but hell, I AM talking about France, whose mighty military has (almost) never seen victory on the battlefield!
Bush was never in danger of being reelected. His tenure in office has been this country's least profitable period in the last ten years, and must I remind you of John Ashcroft?
Panic has been the medium of his presidency, and I have yet to find anybody who actually genuinely *likes* him.
>> However, KDE and Gnome support vector icons, >> while GTK+ 2.x does a better job on >> non-flickering of applications than QT does >> (however not as good of a job that MacOSX does).
>> Rating: Windows XP 8, MacOSX 10, KDE 7.5, BeOS >> 8.5, Gnome 7.5.
I have to agree with the common sentiment that this is clearly an opinion column, and not a fact sheet.
But as I was discussing earlier under another headline, does technical merit really count for anything? People will use what they like best, which is not necessarily the best tool for any particular job. Let them have their preferences. If they want to write about it, that's fine too.
But passing opinions off as fact and hoping for some extra banner impressions is not fine.
My point was not that he is wrong that Gnome sucks (IMO, both Gnome and KDE suck, but to me, gnome sucks a little less).
What I was pointing out is that he presented it in a factually "KDE is better" approach. Better for what? Not me. As an AC pointed out earlier, people will prefer to use broken interfaces if it is what they were trained to use in the first place.
Gnome's interface may be considered broken by some, but ultimately, I believe that Gnome and KDE would both like to clone the Windows(tm) UI as closely as possible (literally, change as little of it as they can)- after all, given the above consideration, the people most likely to switch are the ones who are going to see that Gnome/KDE/Linux can do what they are used to doing in Windows(tm).
So yes, people sometimes prefer to use broken interfaces. God only knows why. But this is a user preference, and if you want a user base, you have to give your users what they want (or they will go elsewhere).
(and I am not trying to ignite a Gnome/KDE hotbed here- those never solved anything. I'm trying to show that people will use what they prefer, regardless of whether it is "technically superior" or not)
You may recall that lately he wrote yet-another-gnome-sucks editorial (completely disregarding the notion of "user preference," which generally disregards technical aspects of a situation in the first place).
I hope he's right about this, but I look at it with cautios optimism. One can never really know for sure whether what you are getting is a factual account ot the way things are, or the way he thinks they oughtta be.
"To attack machines without physical access, the attacker can rely on natural memory errors."
This paper showed some means an attacker could physically cause a memory error, but it never said that such intervention was required to stage the attack. My guess is that this would be most useful with those "low load" ram chips that ran on slashdot a while back.
Slashdot Mirror
Ah, but neither GNU nor Linux are "real" UNIX systems. This man's mission is not to discredit UNIX, but to discredit Linux.
Ostensibly, by not discrediting Linux.
and for those of you who couldn't actually tell, i missed the obligatory sarcasm disclaimer. but seriously, you people can be so screwed up some times. you have no problems with 'majority rule,' as long as you happen to belong to that particular majority. i swear though, they do one thing that pisses people off, and suddenly they feel that the minority should be in charge, for just this special occasion.
Indeed. my idea of a morally acceptable lifestyle is more akin to the likes of Ed Gein and Jeffrey Dahmer. But what the hell does *my* opinion mean against this "so-called moral majority"?
all i have to do to maybe get some cash is claim that i'm stupid? hrm... a difficult claim to make, indeed!
For what it's worth, I do not believe that Rick Santorum is necessarily a homophobe. Think about it for a moment. The current taboos on incest are based on (discarding religious taboos) what? That's right. The high rate of birth defects resulting from incest.
Now, if anal sex is always ok, then what is the problem with anal sex between immediate family members? Technically, nothing.
No, I'm not a fan of Santorum. But you, sir, are a troll. How can Mr. Santorum condone anal sex between siblings, and condemn procreative sex at the same time? If the gay rights movement is correct, then anal sex is ok. If it is ok between perfect strangers, then why not the same for immediate relatives?
And if it is ok between immediate relatives, then is there really a reason that procreative sex is not also ok (given this world that supports the killing of unborn children)? After all, can we not do anything we wish to do without any consequences?
Well we can, according to a great many "experts" in the field of human sexuality. So which is worse:
Condemning homosexual acts between strangers, or condemning heterosexual acts between siblings (including anal sex acts between them)? If I can have anal sex with a stranger, why not with my sister?
Opponents will (of course) remind me of the high rate of birth defects that accompanies incestual deeds. I have already pointed this out, though: Since abortion is so widely supported, it must be acceptable. And if abortion is acceptable and anal sex is acceptable, then there is *no* reason that we should not be having sex with our family members.
Rick is right in that it is tantamount to promoting incest. Bigamy? I don't understand how. But incest? Yeah, I understand that. And for somebody who pretends to be as smart as you are, I would have hoped that you could figure this out on your own.
capisce?
Very, very interesting, if not duplicitous.
That said, I think we have a civic duty to uncover the email addresses of the politicians who passed this bill, and subscribe them to many, many mailing lists for every topic under the sun. Perhaps they will feel differently about spam when they get more of it.
theguardian.co.uk claims that the more a society claims to be ironic, the less so that it really is.
It then goes on to claim that Americans and Germans cannot do irony, while Britons can. Again, how ironic.
I joined the project as a businessman, like Dave Cinege, hoping to make some money. Well, to my credit, I didn't expect somebody to come around with $100,000 for me, but nevertheless, I was deeply offended when people told me that I didn't have the authority to change policy on bug reports (among other things). I got involved in a flame war on the gentoo-core mailing list, and was summarily dismissed from my status as a gentoo developer.
After a night of crying alone, I decided to write a 17 point document justifying my forking of gentoo, to give them what-for. Just to meet the 17 point requirement, I added not less than FOUR sections talking about who I am, where I came from, and what upsets me. I know people like to hear lots of whining.
Long story short, I'm tired of not being in charge. I'm tired of being told that I can't do whatever I want on somebody else's baby. I hope the world sees that I want to take Gentoo in the "right" direction though, and completely disregard my above whining. Thanks for reading the short version. Now go waste some time and read the long version, too.
-- END --
For those of you with any doubts, I am NOT Zack. Another Linux distribution can be good or bad, depending on how you look at it. Mandrake's rallying cry isn't "wwwaaaaahhhh!!! Redhat is fucked up!" Lindows was based on Debian (as have many other distributions) but it didn't get started by some pissed-off debian maintainer who got fed up because he wasn't allowed to make decisions that weren't his.
There's plenty of space in the pool for another player, though; if there's nothing like gentoo available for all those obscure platforms, Zack is more than welcome to make something like it.
My personal opinion, however, is that he's yet another whiny, embittered open source developer.
Do the Lindows Rock. Sorry, it had to be posted. Probably the scariest bit of this is that it's actually hosted on a lindows.com system.
No, but while the other projects i run are seperated from the 'main' application; they are tools to support it. as such, they are inconsequential, unless you happen to run that one project. if you *do* run that one project, then more will be avaialable to you. It's quite simple. :)
Since when does six months of labour constitute a "life's work?" Hell, if I thought the last six months of my labours constituted my "life's work," I would be pretty pissed off, too. That said, Mr. Cinege will be getting no sympathy from me. I run at least one GPLed project, and I don't run it hoping and dreaming that somebody will come around and give me $100,000 for it.
How much more do I have to say before it becomes obvious that expecting this (and "punishing" us by not releasing what you *have* done for another developer to persue) is about the least mature thing I have seen from any developer *ever*?
If this is how you approach life, it's no wonder people are in no hurry to give you $100,000, guy. But all that aside, what entitles you to $100,000, when so many more competent and qualified developers go unpaid? what makes you so much better than they are, Mr. Cinege?
Mod me a troll if you must. Whether you want to admit it or not, "Dave" is being as unreasonable as anybody I have ever seen before. That sort of logic will not get you far in the business world when you want to put food on the table and pay the rent. There's nothing more to say.
Let's put this in perspective here. I work for a large retailer that grosses $60,000 per day or more (per store, not company-wide). How much of this money do I make in this same day? typically between $28 and $40. That's about 0.25% (give or take) of the gross revenues, for those of you not mathematically inclined. To put this in perspective, they're grossing about 50 times as much as I am, per dollar earned.
Granted, the record labels do not have the recurring expense of having to continually refill stock, while my store does, but nevertheless; Record Labels are small fish in the big pond of economics. Sure, they may be making out like bandits as far as this is concerned, but in the grand scheme of things, not many people invest in record labels today, because they just don't make as much money as other industries do.
"Hi, we don't like having to compete with these guys. Could you please help us destroy our competition? If you do this, competition between the existing installations will improve! Really!"
I (for one) am not a spammer, but that does not mean I want some technically savvy idiot coming along and digging for my personal information, even if he is just going to give it to the government.
Being slightly intoxicated, I can't pretend to understand most of what you said; apart from going AWOL. This is important; I do not know how Britain handles AWOL soldiers in wartime, but if you join the United States Army and go AWOL in time of war, you may be shot and killed on sight by the US Army. Don't believe me? Go sign up, there's a form you have to fill out that gives them permission to do this.
You go away in time of war, you won't get any medals. You might even not come home alive.
in the meantime, the users (who greatly outnumber the developers) are the ones who decide whether or not to *use* flash content.
i can hardly believe that you choose to extol flash for its built in DRM abilities, which (if you think about it) don't work.
Anybody can take a screenshot of the window whenever they want to, and making surfing your website difficult is going to affect you, more than anybody else. It irritates your users, who decide to stop looking at it. This (obviously) means fewer banner impressions for you, and makes it more difficult to bring in a profit.
who in their right mind deliberately and knowingly alienates a valid part of their potential client pool, just so that their images won't be used elsewhere?
Is there anything in this course that Microsoft could stamp as their "property," and forbid use of it in software attached to "viral" licenses?
Or is this more rational, generic thinking that anybody could use anywhere?
Hah. if france deployed nuclear weapons, what would the world think? have you considered that there is a whole world outside of france? Who struck first does not matter- Well, it does, but it's a seperate offense, and would be dealt with. On the other hand, for any country to launch nuclear weapons is going to ensure that country's total annihilation, regardless of "who started it." not withstanding. This is why you will not see North Korea launching an attack on the USA with nuclear weapons. Yeah, they have them. Are they going to use them? Pigs will fly.
I don't give a damn about the economy. I belong to a minority of people who believes it is more important to live with good ethics and morals than it is to live with lots of money.
I really do believe that Bush has demonstrated that he is totally devoid of both, and should be impeached.
Addressing the situation is long past due, but could have been done via other means (i.e., a more surgical strike designed to capture Hussein). Our government has done assassinations for a long time now, the year 2003 does not seem like it should be any different.
Karma was meant to be a yo-yo anyway...
Don't be such a pussy. When they enlisted, it was under the realisation that they may be deployed in wartime. If they are in Iraq, then it is because either they wanted to be there, or they thought it was an acceptable risk to take for the benefits they received by joining the army. You can't expect to volunteer for 6-8 years of service, and then complain when you actually have to WORK for your benefits.
And while I'm at the risk of losing karma, it's worth mentioning that I believe that when we're through with Fraq, we should invade France and divide it evenly between its immediate neighbors. I'm beginning to grow weary of Chirac's incessant whining. Now, it may be a little bit premature to assume that we'll win, but hell, I AM talking about France, whose mighty military has (almost) never seen victory on the battlefield!
Bush was never in danger of being reelected. His tenure in office has been this country's least profitable period in the last ten years, and must I remind you of John Ashcroft?
Panic has been the medium of his presidency, and I have yet to find anybody who actually genuinely *likes* him.
>> However, KDE and Gnome support vector icons,
>> while GTK+ 2.x does a better job on
>> non-flickering of applications than QT does
>> (however not as good of a job that MacOSX does).
>> Rating: Windows XP 8, MacOSX 10, KDE 7.5, BeOS
>> 8.5, Gnome 7.5.
I have to agree with the common sentiment that this is clearly an opinion column, and not a fact sheet.
But as I was discussing earlier under another headline, does technical merit really count for anything? People will use what they like best, which is not necessarily the best tool for any particular job. Let them have their preferences. If they want to write about it, that's fine too.
But passing opinions off as fact and hoping for some extra banner impressions is not fine.
My point was not that he is wrong that Gnome sucks (IMO, both Gnome and KDE suck, but to me, gnome sucks a little less).
What I was pointing out is that he presented it in a factually "KDE is better" approach. Better for what? Not me. As an AC pointed out earlier, people will prefer to use broken interfaces if it is what they were trained to use in the first place.
Gnome's interface may be considered broken by some, but ultimately, I believe that Gnome and KDE would both like to clone the Windows(tm) UI as closely as possible (literally, change as little of it as they can)- after all, given the above consideration, the people most likely to switch are the ones who are going to see that Gnome/KDE/Linux can do what they are used to doing in Windows(tm).
So yes, people sometimes prefer to use broken interfaces. God only knows why. But this is a user preference, and if you want a user base, you have to give your users what they want (or they will go elsewhere).
(and I am not trying to ignite a Gnome/KDE hotbed here- those never solved anything. I'm trying to show that people will use what they prefer, regardless of whether it is "technically superior" or not)
You may recall that lately he wrote yet-another-gnome-sucks editorial (completely disregarding the notion of "user preference," which generally disregards technical aspects of a situation in the first place).
I hope he's right about this, but I look at it with cautios optimism. One can never really know for sure whether what you are getting is a factual account ot the way things are, or the way he thinks they oughtta be.
Page 7, Paragraph 3:
"To attack machines without physical access, the attacker can rely on natural memory errors."
This paper showed some means an attacker could physically cause a memory error, but it never said that such intervention was required to stage the attack. My guess is that this would be most useful with those "low load" ram chips that ran on slashdot a while back.