From reading the interview of a 419 scammer on ebolamonkeyman.com, it sounds like these are mostly big operations set up by people with a lot of money. So, these people may be from any part of the world, but the operations definitely take place in Nigerian, probably because law enforcement there doesn't give that much of a fuck.
comparing installing mozilla on linux and windows. One could be done by a bird trained to peck at pictures, the other requires hours of reading. Then trying, failing, and trying again another way with little if any indication as tho why it crapped out the first time.
Ok, installing Mozilla on linux is one command (apt-get install mozilla, emerge mozilla, up2date mozilla, urpmi mozilla, etc). Sorry if I got any of those commands wrong, but you get the point.
Installing on Windows, you have to go the web page, find the link for downloading, click on link and download to a directory, execute the exe, click through a few windows, and then you've finally got it installed.
Ok, so in Windows its a little bit longer, but I wouldn't say that it "requires hours of reading." Installing software on Windows can be tedious, and sometimes its not entirely straightforward (nor is there a standard process, each software is different), but its really not that bad, and most people can figure it out.
I guess you can't get too far when your only motivation is this:
"I wanted to use Linux so I could say I knew how"
So you could put it on your resume and fool companies into thinking you were knowledgeable? Or so you could act like a badass?
Do you also code C, Java, PHP, and VB so you can say you do?
Linux is no walk in the park, but if you're really someone who is interested in computers, using Linux will help develop skills in troubleshooting, debugging, etc. For programmers, its a much nicer environment to hack in. And if you sincerely do learn Linux, it is a skill that you can put on your resume, and many employers will be impressed by it (not all, though). But don't put it on your resume if you don't actually know your shit, interviewers will find out what you know or don't know.
Knoppix is as newbie friendly as it gets. If it doesn't auto-detect your video card, its either too new or too obscure. Seriously, try it. Or try the latest Mandrake (not an older version), or use Libranet to install Debian.
Put some serious effort (not half-assed effort like you've done so far) before you come on Slashdot and post a message that is just begging for people to call you a dumbass.
I believe you that you're not a troll. But goddamn do you sound like one.
I guess you're just an example of what Linux has to cater to to get at more desktops -- people who aren't willing to research their problems and aren't willing to try to get things to work.
For someone who supposedly codes in C and Java, haven't you ever had a compiler error or runtime error you didn't quite understand? What do you do? Say "oh fuck it, this program isn't worth writing and this language isn't worth writing in"?
I listened to some speaches by him (just a recording, Google and you might find such recordings). He's not all that bad at speaking, but he exhibits exactly the attitude you'd imagine him to have from reading his writings, etc.
Still, my point remains, to say that Linux was "only a command-line interface to a filesystem" or to say that it could only do xterms is wrong. There were GUI apps, regardless of how they compare to those of other OSes or how much effort they took to develop.
I guess we disagree as to what we consider "fully-functional."
The taskbar was, amazingly enough, a relatively unique idea.
Sorry, I meant start menu. The taskbar itself, I guess, was unique enough. But regardless of who borrowed from who, the point was there was significant GUI features in X window managers even at that time. And there were (and still are) many things that even Windows didn't have.
The Linux experience in 1995 was way better than what Microsoft had to offer, especially for internet applications and for running a stable OS that worked without much hassle.
However, an admin who says they can help cut admin costs is digging someone's grave.
Have you considered that maybe these admins are overworked as it is? There are many other important (and more interesting) tasks they could be doing, but they are stuck cleaning up after worms, etc.
Then there are some of us who are developers who also have admin responsibilities due to the fact that we are understaffed. We'd rather be writing code than running around patching systems and removing worms that people brought in with their laptops.
There's plenty of work, we don't need more. And we don't need this kind of petty shit for job security, there are real problems that need to be solved.
Sorry, all I remember are Afterstep, fvwm, Netscape and Motif. Oh, and xsnow. Hardly comparable to Windows 95 or MacOS 7.x.
There were a lot of apps you may not remember. Granted, these apps weren't comparable to what was on Windows or MacOS, but to say that Linux had no GUI or that it was just a bunch of xterms is completely wrong. I guess there was enough command-line/text-mode software that it didn't matter. Netrek rocked, though:)
I remember Linux being stable and providing a GUI that did everything I needed. And I remember Win95 being a buggy piece of shit that crashed consistently.
Contrary to what seems to be popular belief in the unix world, "GUI" and "screen full of xterms" are not equivalent.
Honestly, did you even use Linux and XFree86 in 1995? GUI = graphical user interface. The Linux GUI had a hell of lot more than a "screen full of xterms." In 1995 there were fully-functional window managers and plenty of GUI apps. A lot of this came from the existing UNIX GUI apps that were ported to Linux.
Hell, I even remember the Windows 95 taskbar and right-click menu as being considered something that was copied from X window managers.
Yep, at the same period that Linux was only a command-line interface to a filesystem. Cool, maybe, but useless without applications.
Bullshit. When Windows 95 came out, Linux (and UNIX) was well ahead of it. It had a complete GUI and had a lot more networking and internet apps than Windows did. Windows had to play catch-up to get all the things that Linux/UNIX already had. These days, a lot of *nix apps have been ported to Windows, but there was a time when Linux/UNIX had a significant advantage in applications and tools (it still does in my opinion, but its not as obvious).
Now that I think about it, that's basicaly what MS did with the Xbox. I wonder how easy/difficult it would be to play those games on a standard PC?
The XBox is a different architecture than a standard PC. For example, the video RAM and system RAM are shared. From what I've heard, it wouldn't be that easy, you'd need to emulate the hardware. Doing a little Googling, there are some XBox emulators and even a project that attempts to convert XBox executables to PC executables. I don't know whether these are fakes or not, though.
on production servers, security is a high priority while new features can take a back seat. if a new hole or exploit is found in some service, will the 'STABLE' package be upgraded for protection?
Debian stable is the first place that gets patched, before unstable or testing.
So? Every day millions of sheep sit on the couch, eat Cheetos and watch the same crap at the same time, the reality show, the latest hot sitcom or jocks throwing balls. They have no free will. "Watch the game, watch the ads, consume." Millions of sheep laughing at the same time as Actor X trips and spills water on Actor Y.. Fuck that, read a good book.
Read a good book? And you're not a sheep if you do that? It's all the same. It really takes more than not watching TV and reading a good book to be a non-conformist. Try a little harder and you just might get there.
What about the availability of user-created content? Does Half-Life for consoles have TFC or Counter-Strike or any other mod?
Yeah, that's one of the things console games probably don't have (AFAIK). Though with the XBox's hard drive or loading over the network, the possibility for this may be there.
I need to get back into PC gaming. If anything for the simple fact that I could throw a decent LAN party with just the machines I have in my home.
Well, I can see both sides. I used to play both PC games and console games, but then started playing only console games (and now, no games at all). I can see why people prefer console games. PC games ARE buggy and error-prone. Console games offer most of the advantages that PC games once had: network play, high-resolution graphics, etc. If I was serious about gaming, I'd go and spend $100 (or whatever) on a console. I'd connect the console to either my PC monitor or to an HDTV.
However, when you already have several PCs sitting around networked together, why not use them for gaming? And of course, some of those bleeding edge games are really sweet, but I don't have $500 to spend on a video card. Multipurpose PC makes sense, but PC for the sole purpose of gaming generally does not.
If it kicks ass it kicks ass. So far, Microsoft seems to only put out mediocre products (Win2k) or products that are total shit (Win 1,2,3,95,98,ME) or products that mediocre pieces of shit (WinXP).
If they produce a product that is great in every way, kudos to them. I will use it if it is worth using.
Will people still bitch? Sure, who doesn't bitch? Even non-techies bitch about how Windows sucks, even when they've never used anything else. But I think you'll see less bitching. Just like after Win2k there was less bitching. All of sudden we could say "ok, Microsoft put out an OS that doesn't totally suck ass and it works on consumer desktops."
Now, is Microsoft going to be able to pull this off? I have my doubts. We'll see in 2006 or whenever its released.
One reason that I can see for Apple *not* releasing a fix for 10.2 (if this is true, which I highly doubt) is that Apple *needs* everyone (developers and users) to be on the same page.
That would all fine and dandy if they didn't charge $130 fucking dollars for an upgrade!
I'll give Apple the benefit of the doubt, and hope that they just haven't gotten around to writing patches for 10.2.
Slashdot Mirror
Also, how easy would it be to photoshop it? Just take a picture with someone holding a blank sheet of paper, then add text.
From reading the interview of a 419 scammer on ebolamonkeyman.com, it sounds like these are mostly big operations set up by people with a lot of money. So, these people may be from any part of the world, but the operations definitely take place in Nigerian, probably because law enforcement there doesn't give that much of a fuck.
comparing installing mozilla on linux and windows.
One could be done by a bird trained to peck at pictures, the other requires hours of reading. Then trying, failing, and trying again another way with little if any indication as tho why it crapped out the first time.
Ok, installing Mozilla on linux is one command (apt-get install mozilla, emerge mozilla, up2date mozilla, urpmi mozilla, etc). Sorry if I got any of those commands wrong, but you get the point.
Installing on Windows, you have to go the web page, find the link for downloading, click on link and download to a directory, execute the exe, click through a few windows, and then you've finally got it installed.
Ok, so in Windows its a little bit longer, but I wouldn't say that it "requires hours of reading." Installing software on Windows can be tedious, and sometimes its not entirely straightforward (nor is there a standard process, each software is different), but its really not that bad, and most people can figure it out.
Too bad those CDs will degrade in a few years and your reserves consist soley of Britney Spears and N'Sync.
I believe he also has a robot in his technology cellar that goes and makes a copy of each and every CD every few years. That's what I do anyways.
I guess you can't get too far when your only motivation is this:
"I wanted to use Linux so I could say I knew how"
So you could put it on your resume and fool companies into thinking you were knowledgeable? Or so you could act like a badass?
Do you also code C, Java, PHP, and VB so you can say you do?
Linux is no walk in the park, but if you're really someone who is interested in computers, using Linux will help develop skills in troubleshooting, debugging, etc. For programmers, its a much nicer environment to hack in. And if you sincerely do learn Linux, it is a skill that you can put on your resume, and many employers will be impressed by it (not all, though). But don't put it on your resume if you don't actually know your shit, interviewers will find out what you know or don't know.
Knoppix is as newbie friendly as it gets. If it doesn't auto-detect your video card, its either too new or too obscure. Seriously, try it. Or try the latest Mandrake (not an older version), or use Libranet to install Debian.
Put some serious effort (not half-assed effort like you've done so far) before you come on Slashdot and post a message that is just begging for people to call you a dumbass.
I believe you that you're not a troll. But goddamn do you sound like one.
I guess you're just an example of what Linux has to cater to to get at more desktops -- people who aren't willing to research their problems and aren't willing to try to get things to work.
For someone who supposedly codes in C and Java, haven't you ever had a compiler error or runtime error you didn't quite understand? What do you do? Say "oh fuck it, this program isn't worth writing and this language isn't worth writing in"?
Get a Knoppix CD and try again.
I listened to some speaches by him (just a recording, Google and you might find such recordings). He's not all that bad at speaking, but he exhibits exactly the attitude you'd imagine him to have from reading his writings, etc.
Still, my point remains, to say that Linux was "only a command-line interface to a filesystem" or to say that it could only do xterms is wrong. There were GUI apps, regardless of how they compare to those of other OSes or how much effort they took to develop.
Decent copy & paste ? Nope. Integrated file management ? Nope. Common dialogs ? Nope. HCI guidelines ? Nope. Graphical configuration tools ? Nope. Drag & drop ? Nope.
I guess we disagree as to what we consider "fully-functional."
The taskbar was, amazingly enough, a relatively unique idea.
Sorry, I meant start menu. The taskbar itself, I guess, was unique enough. But regardless of who borrowed from who, the point was there was significant GUI features in X window managers even at that time. And there were (and still are) many things that even Windows didn't have.
The Linux experience in 1995 was way better than what Microsoft had to offer, especially for internet applications and for running a stable OS that worked without much hassle.
However, an admin who says they can help cut admin costs is digging someone's grave.
Have you considered that maybe these admins are overworked as it is? There are many other important (and more interesting) tasks they could be doing, but they are stuck cleaning up after worms, etc.
Then there are some of us who are developers who also have admin responsibilities due to the fact that we are understaffed. We'd rather be writing code than running around patching systems and removing worms that people brought in with their laptops.
There's plenty of work, we don't need more. And we don't need this kind of petty shit for job security, there are real problems that need to be solved.
If Microsoft is going and finding bugs/vulnerabilities in OSS, great! OSS can use the extra bit of help finding these bugs.
Microsoft, can you do us a favor and send a bug report while you're at it?
Sorry, all I remember are Afterstep, fvwm, Netscape and Motif. Oh, and xsnow. Hardly comparable to Windows 95 or MacOS 7.x.
:)
There were a lot of apps you may not remember. Granted, these apps weren't comparable to what was on Windows or MacOS, but to say that Linux had no GUI or that it was just a bunch of xterms is completely wrong. I guess there was enough command-line/text-mode software that it didn't matter. Netrek rocked, though
I remember Linux being stable and providing a GUI that did everything I needed. And I remember Win95 being a buggy piece of shit that crashed consistently.
Contrary to what seems to be popular belief in the unix world, "GUI" and "screen full of xterms" are not equivalent.
Honestly, did you even use Linux and XFree86 in 1995? GUI = graphical user interface. The Linux GUI had a hell of lot more than a "screen full of xterms." In 1995 there were fully-functional window managers and plenty of GUI apps. A lot of this came from the existing UNIX GUI apps that were ported to Linux.
Hell, I even remember the Windows 95 taskbar and right-click menu as being considered something that was copied from X window managers.
Yep, at the same period that Linux was only a command-line interface to a filesystem. Cool, maybe, but useless without applications.
Bullshit. When Windows 95 came out, Linux (and UNIX) was well ahead of it. It had a complete GUI and had a lot more networking and internet apps than Windows did. Windows had to play catch-up to get all the things that Linux/UNIX already had. These days, a lot of *nix apps have been ported to Windows, but there was a time when Linux/UNIX had a significant advantage in applications and tools (it still does in my opinion, but its not as obvious).
Now that I think about it, that's basicaly what MS did with the Xbox. I wonder how easy/difficult it would be to play those games on a standard PC?
The XBox is a different architecture than a standard PC. For example, the video RAM and system RAM are shared. From what I've heard, it wouldn't be that easy, you'd need to emulate the hardware. Doing a little Googling, there are some XBox emulators and even a project that attempts to convert XBox executables to PC executables. I don't know whether these are fakes or not, though.
on production servers, security is a high priority while new features can take a back seat.
if a new hole or exploit is found in some service, will the 'STABLE' package be upgraded for protection?
Debian stable is the first place that gets patched, before unstable or testing.
So? Every day millions of sheep sit on the couch, eat Cheetos and watch the same crap at the same time, the reality show, the latest hot sitcom or jocks throwing balls. They have no free will. "Watch the game, watch the ads, consume." Millions of sheep laughing at the same time as Actor X trips and spills water on Actor Y..
Fuck that, read a good book.
Read a good book? And you're not a sheep if you do that? It's all the same. It really takes more than not watching TV and reading a good book to be a non-conformist. Try a little harder and you just might get there.
nt
I think many of us already know which candidates we support. This article is just a humorous way of showing that support.
I'm with Apache/Linux, though Apache/FreeBSD might also work well.
What about the availability of user-created content? Does Half-Life for consoles have TFC or Counter-Strike or any other mod?
Yeah, that's one of the things console games probably don't have (AFAIK). Though with the XBox's hard drive or loading over the network, the possibility for this may be there.
I need to get back into PC gaming. If anything for the simple fact that I could throw a decent LAN party with just the machines I have in my home.
Goldeneye. Exception to the rule, of course.
Well, I can see both sides. I used to play both PC games and console games, but then started playing only console games (and now, no games at all). I can see why people prefer console games. PC games ARE buggy and error-prone. Console games offer most of the advantages that PC games once had: network play, high-resolution graphics, etc. If I was serious about gaming, I'd go and spend $100 (or whatever) on a console. I'd connect the console to either my PC monitor or to an HDTV.
However, when you already have several PCs sitting around networked together, why not use them for gaming? And of course, some of those bleeding edge games are really sweet, but I don't have $500 to spend on a video card. Multipurpose PC makes sense, but PC for the sole purpose of gaming generally does not.
If it kicks ass it kicks ass. So far, Microsoft seems to only put out mediocre products (Win2k) or products that are total shit (Win 1,2,3,95,98,ME) or products that mediocre pieces of shit (WinXP).
If they produce a product that is great in every way, kudos to them. I will use it if it is worth using.
Will people still bitch? Sure, who doesn't bitch? Even non-techies bitch about how Windows sucks, even when they've never used anything else. But I think you'll see less bitching. Just like after Win2k there was less bitching. All of sudden we could say "ok, Microsoft put out an OS that doesn't totally suck ass and it works on consumer desktops."
Now, is Microsoft going to be able to pull this off? I have my doubts. We'll see in 2006 or whenever its released.
Did you just say you want to give Steve a hand job?
One reason that I can see for Apple *not* releasing a fix for 10.2 (if this is true, which I highly doubt) is that Apple *needs* everyone (developers and users) to be on the same page.
That would all fine and dandy if they didn't charge $130 fucking dollars for an upgrade!
I'll give Apple the benefit of the doubt, and hope that they just haven't gotten around to writing patches for 10.2.
Why, a simple "yes > /dev/mem" command crashes it, hello, windows called they want their crashes back!
:)
Nice attempt at humor. That might've been funny back in 1994