Being a parent gives you a pretty immediate answer to this question. Some children are fine. Some children are not. I have two children. My eldest (6) gets totally thoroughly addicted to video. As soon as he has a little bit, he just wants to watch more and more and more. My youngest one (4) will watch a little, get bored, play outside, maybe go back to it. This has always been true, ever since they were 1. My eldest one will keep watching forgetting all about eating, peeing, or whatever. All those needs will literally jump at him at the same time, and he will routinely enter a major destructive tantrum when the video is stopped. As a parent, I had to go for a video-free life. They are allowed very very little video on week ends, but that's it. Any more than that and my 6 year old will just. Go. Nuts. Asking for it every moment of the week. I let them play VR (I have a Rift and a Vive), which has proven to be non-addictive (again, not scientific, just my experience with them). But, it'snot clear whether it's good or bad for the eyes...
Any comment saying that VR is actually awesome are buried -- like mine, and others. and most comments from haters are _clearly_ from people who have NO IDEA what VR is TODAY.
Tech is ready, games are awesome, numbers are high -- and whiners are plentiful.
I hwo a Vive and an Oculus. I prefer the Vive, but each one has its pros and cons. I read comments here, and I have this huge feeling that very few of them own a headset. I am NOT an avid gamer -- in fact, I don't play games at all. However, I do love VR and play with it as much as I can. If you don't know what RecRoom is (and you probably don't), then of course you are going to say that there is no killer app. if you haven't played the laser games, or the quests, or one of the many custom rooms, of course you will say it's boring. Honestly, if you spend more than 20 minutes in RecRoom, play a laser game, a quest, or maybe Royale, you will realise that all of this bullshit about small screens, etc. just melts away -- you are too busy playing and enjoying yourself.
My ideal headset is super light, has a total field of vision, it doesn't need sensors (inside-out tracking) and has glove-like controllers. This will happen in time -- in fact, all of this is already happening. In the meantime, it's still FUN.
If you actually tried, you'd know what I am talking about.
I own an Oculus Rift and have spent a substantial number of hours on VR. What we really want, is an Oculus Rift with:
* Wireless headset. I would be very happy to have a battery back around my belt, or whatever. Please not on my head. * Sensort-less tracking. I want to be able to take it anywhere
But, having a small bloody computer in there... really? No thanks. I will gladly use my own computer with a nice 1080, or my Gaming laptop with a nice 1050 (not much, but OK) if I really want to take it outside.
I really hope I can hook up the Quest to a PC and use it as a headset.
There is no law that prohibits Apple from buying there own products from Ireland at whichever price they like. I support regulation against this. As most people do. I do NOT support Apple when they whine about tax laws being changed. I cannot stand it, however, when governments make baseless requests to companies NOT to follow their laws.
Make laws against what Apple (and everybody else) is doing. Then force them to follow the new rules.
Till then, keep the plebes (us) happy with big speeches about morality.
This is insane. A country has the power to make laws. New Zealand has laws and agreements in place that ALLOW this. Then, the same government whines if these agreements are used by companies. If I make a rule in my house, where anybody coming in can take a candy per person, I should not complain about a greedy family of 36 shows up and takes 36 candies. I can change the rules, adjust them, fix them, but definitely not whinge about it.
Those laws are made to please the politician's rich friends -- as well as the politicians themselves -- so that they can move their assets and income to countries with stupidly low rates (Ireland, Caribbean, etc.). If you don't want this to happen, change the laws. If you can't change the laws without upsetting your rich friends, put up and shut up.
That WAS the case around 1998! Nokia phones had a Java virtual machine. Linux had one. Windows and Mac had one. It was universal. Granted, it was still limited (you couldn't run the same apps on phones and desktops), but that was more of a technological problem than anything else (phones were puny compared to desktops, whereas the gap today is much narrower).
It was nearly 20 years ago... Desktop apps in Java barely exist today.
That sounds like a great idea, after you've tested that you can bring up a clone of your production system onto a spare [virtual] machine from the backups. If you don't do that first, then it sounds like an expensive way of discovering the bug that caused you to lose all of your customers' data.
That should be a given. But, being able to do that doesn't mean that you WILL be able to recover quickly from a REAL outage (hence the voluntary, self-inflicted outage))
"If you have not successfully tested a restore and you do not have a completely offline copy, you do not have a backup." OK, now that I have repeated it, let me add.
As a CEO, and a CTO, you MUST test backups and resiliency by artificially creating downtime and real-life events. You switch off the main server. Or instruct the hosting company to reboot the main server, unplug the main hard drive, and plug it back in. Then you sit up, and watch with great interest what happens.
THEN you will see, for real, how your company reacts to real disasters.
The difference is that if anything _really_ wrong happens, you can turn the hard drive back on and fire a few people.
Smart companies do it. For a reason. Yes it creates downtime. But yes it can save your company.
I wrote more than 200 articles and edited more than 2000. I ran FSM for years -- 11 years that is. Free software magazine started as a printed Magazine, with 5 issues actually printed and "real" subscribers. I am now writing one article a day while rebooting it. I am going to stop here or I will sound "narcissistic" and full of myself".
Baseless personal attacks and attempts to discredit me continue.
And by the way, the popup will stay. People who care about Free Software Magazine will make an account and see it disappear. People who want to read an article every now and then can make the huge effort of pressing the X button. People who consider a modal a reason to leave.. I am happy to see them leave. No hard feelings.
You wrote a blog article. On a site, which forces a (dysfunctional) popup first onto the user. You try to push it via slashdot.
I never pushed this via Slashdot. Given the current audience at Slashdot, I with it never got here.
Okay, here is much mediocre content, and your point is worth to blog about, it's not really worth a newssite article. Anyway now it's here.
I am not sure what you are defining "mediocre". I am not sure if it's worth a newssite. I didn't place the article here, so it's not something I can do anything about.
Then you got the critique, just as above, often a bit more harsh.
Oh, I wish I got some critique. Have you _actually_ read the comments, all of them? It was a huge flood of personal attacks, attempts to discredit me, and just plain nastiness. Very little about the article itself, or even the _summary_.
What are you doing? You're presenting, what you are, what you are doing, why you are deserving that people value your article.
Really you're more defining your person, not your article. And this is the first place, where you actually bring your person into the discussion. But when you try to tell us "hey, i am cool, because i have github projects, do this, do that", you challenge us to judge you by your presentation, you challenge us to decide if we think it's worthy or not.
I only brought my GitHub account, and what I do, when somebody pointed out that I didn't do "that much" -- obviously without even checking. Again, the discussion was shifted, focussed on me, who am I do say this? Oh you are a free software author, but c'mon, how many users do you have... And so on.
This is the wrong point, but you brought yourself into the situation. We are here for the slashdot article, especially the discussion of it, and your article. You got some negative feedback to the article, which might be correct or not.
I wish. I got tons of personal attacks, and amazingly little about the article.
But you take it personal and bring the discussion to the personal level.
What?
And you attack others ("where are your open source contributions?").
I did eventually get sick of anonymous cowards trying to discredit me in every possible way, yes.
Stop it. You're okay as everyone else here, even when nothing is contributed to open source. You should not define yourself by the contributions. Not by your code, not by your articles.
You are writing this without having read the comments. Once again: I only mentioned my repo when Anonymous Troll kept on trying, in every possible way, to discredit me, and saying "Who am I to even tell us what to do?" I wasn't telling ANYBODY not to use proprietary software. I was, as a free software developer, pointing out that Canonical was mixing free and non free software Al I pointed out, is that I would have liked them to give a filtering option. I care because I do develop free software.
Otherwise you take critique to your stuff as insult to your person. And if you publicly define yourself by your content, others will do so as well.
And when you have seperated the two, start accepting the (negative) feedback about your stuff . Not everything must be as good as it was meant, not everything has to be good right at the start. You may improve, you may do better next, you may see that some people find it not as bad as the most people here.
I guess much stuff from your open source repos and so on is valued by many people, which is good. And if its only useful for yourself, the try to make it open for the case somebody's interested is good anyway. But do not bring this as defense for other stuff, which is not valued. You're mixing things and thus the critque and attacks mix up things as well. You do
After countless attempts by Anonymous Cowards to attach me in every possible way, and try anything to undermine myself as a person, when I point out what I actually did, I am suddenly saying that "I am the greatest", I am narcissistic, and that I am unable to accept critique?
This is another comment that uses the same vocabulary, sentence structure and type of abuse as all of the other abusive comments. No matter how hard you try, you do not represent Slashdot. Sorry.
I have the feeling that it's "The person who posts as Anonymous Cowards", rather than "people". I think there is one troll here making all the fuss. Same vocabulary, same style, same type of attacks... Or maybe I am just being hopeful!
Slashdot Mirror
Being a parent gives you a pretty immediate answer to this question.
Some children are fine. Some children are not.
I have two children. My eldest (6) gets totally thoroughly addicted to video. As soon as he has a little bit, he just wants to watch more and more and more. My youngest one (4) will watch a little, get bored, play outside, maybe go back to it. This has always been true, ever since they were 1.
My eldest one will keep watching forgetting all about eating, peeing, or whatever. All those needs will literally jump at him at the same time, and he will routinely enter a major destructive tantrum when the video is stopped.
As a parent, I had to go for a video-free life. They are allowed very very little video on week ends, but that's it. Any more than that and my 6 year old will just. Go. Nuts. Asking for it every moment of the week.
I let them play VR (I have a Rift and a Vive), which has proven to be non-addictive (again, not scientific, just my experience with them). But, it'snot clear whether it's good or bad for the eyes...
Any comment saying that VR is actually awesome are buried -- like mine, and others. and most comments from haters are _clearly_ from people who have NO IDEA what VR is TODAY.
Tech is ready, games are awesome, numbers are high -- and whiners are plentiful.
I hwo a Vive and an Oculus. I prefer the Vive, but each one has its pros and cons.
I read comments here, and I have this huge feeling that very few of them own a headset.
I am NOT an avid gamer -- in fact, I don't play games at all. However, I do love VR and play with it as much as I can.
If you don't know what RecRoom is (and you probably don't), then of course you are going to say that there is no killer app.
if you haven't played the laser games, or the quests, or one of the many custom rooms, of course you will say it's boring.
Honestly, if you spend more than 20 minutes in RecRoom, play a laser game, a quest, or maybe Royale, you will realise that all of this bullshit about small screens, etc. just melts away -- you are too busy playing and enjoying yourself.
My ideal headset is super light, has a total field of vision, it doesn't need sensors (inside-out tracking) and has glove-like controllers. This will happen in time -- in fact, all of this is already happening. In the meantime, it's still FUN.
If you actually tried, you'd know what I am talking about.
I own an Oculus Rift and have spent a substantial number of hours on VR.
What we really want, is an Oculus Rift with:
* Wireless headset. I would be very happy to have a battery back around my belt, or whatever. Please not on my head.
* Sensort-less tracking. I want to be able to take it anywhere
But, having a small bloody computer in there... really? No thanks. I will gladly use my own computer with a nice 1080, or my Gaming laptop with a nice 1050 (not much, but OK) if I really want to take it outside.
I really hope I can hook up the Quest to a PC and use it as a headset.
Love your signature. You obviously had a super fast floppy disk drive... I never managed to get my hands on one of those! :)
I wonder how many here understand it :)
There is no law that prohibits Apple from buying there own products from Ireland at whichever price they like.
I support regulation against this. As most people do.
I do NOT support Apple when they whine about tax laws being changed. I cannot stand it, however, when governments make baseless requests to companies NOT to follow their laws.
Make laws against what Apple (and everybody else) is doing. Then force them to follow the new rules.
Till then, keep the plebes (us) happy with big speeches about morality.
Free Software Magazine
This is insane. A country has the power to make laws. New Zealand has laws and agreements in place that ALLOW this. Then, the same government whines if these agreements are used by companies.
If I make a rule in my house, where anybody coming in can take a candy per person, I should not complain about a greedy family of 36 shows up and takes 36 candies. I can change the rules, adjust them, fix them, but definitely not whinge about it.
Those laws are made to please the politician's rich friends -- as well as the politicians themselves -- so that they can move their assets and income to countries with stupidly low rates (Ireland, Caribbean, etc.). If you don't want this to happen, change the laws. If you can't change the laws without upsetting your rich friends, put up and shut up.
Free Software Magazine
That WAS the case around 1998! Nokia phones had a Java virtual machine. Linux had one. Windows and Mac had one. It was universal. Granted, it was still limited (you couldn't run the same apps on phones and desktops), but that was more of a technological problem than anything else (phones were puny compared to desktops, whereas the gap today is much narrower).
It was nearly 20 years ago... Desktop apps in Java barely exist today.
Maybe Webassembly will succeed?
That sounds like a great idea, after you've tested that you can bring up a clone of your production system onto a spare [virtual] machine from the backups. If you don't do that first, then it sounds like an expensive way of discovering the bug that caused you to lose all of your customers' data.
That should be a given. But, being able to do that doesn't mean that you WILL be able to recover quickly from a REAL outage (hence the voluntary, self-inflicted outage))
"If you have not successfully tested a restore and you do not have a completely offline copy, you do not have a backup."
OK, now that I have repeated it, let me add.
As a CEO, and a CTO, you MUST test backups and resiliency by artificially creating downtime and real-life events. You switch off the main server. Or instruct the hosting company to reboot the main server, unplug the main hard drive, and plug it back in. Then you sit up, and watch with great interest what happens.
THEN you will see, for real, how your company reacts to real disasters.
The difference is that if anything _really_ wrong happens, you can turn the hard drive back on and fire a few people.
Smart companies do it. For a reason. Yes it creates downtime. But yes it can save your company.
http://www.datacenterknowledge...
Merc.
It's all fun games till the tape breaks and the driver dives down.
What about the curly fur in the underground grass?!?!?
The framed printout stands.
I wrote more than 200 articles and edited more than 2000. I ran FSM for years -- 11 years that is. Free software magazine started as a printed
Magazine, with 5 issues actually printed and "real" subscribers. I am now writing one article a day while rebooting it. I am going to stop here or I will sound "narcissistic" and full of myself".
Baseless personal attacks and attempts to discredit me continue.
"Many implementations of Node.js are asynchronous." I am going to frame this one.
Well, it could actually be an ideal giraffe too. But that would be way too pretentious.
In a fair legion of cats chasing really fast cars.
And by the way, the popup will stay. People who care about Free Software Magazine will make an account and see it disappear. People who want to read an article every now and then can make the huge effort of pressing the X button. People who consider a modal a reason to leave.. I am happy to see them leave. No hard feelings.
Okay, let's be not too harsh.
You wrote a blog article. On a site, which forces a (dysfunctional) popup first onto the user. You try to push it via slashdot.
I never pushed this via Slashdot. Given the current audience at Slashdot, I with it never got here.
Okay, here is much mediocre content, and your point is worth to blog about, it's not really worth a newssite article. Anyway now it's here.
I am not sure what you are defining "mediocre". I am not sure if it's worth a newssite. I didn't place the article here, so it's not something I can do anything about.
Then you got the critique, just as above, often a bit more harsh.
Oh, I wish I got some critique. Have you _actually_ read the comments, all of them? It was a huge flood of personal attacks, attempts to discredit me, and just plain nastiness. Very little about the article itself, or even the _summary_.
What are you doing? You're presenting, what you are, what you are doing, why you are deserving that people value your article.
Really you're more defining your person, not your article. And this is the first place, where you actually bring your person into the discussion. But when you try to tell us "hey, i am cool, because i have github projects, do this, do that", you challenge us to judge you by your presentation, you challenge us to decide if we think it's worthy or not.
I only brought my GitHub account, and what I do, when somebody pointed out that I didn't do "that much" -- obviously without even checking. Again, the discussion was shifted, focussed on me, who am I do say this? Oh you are a free software author, but c'mon, how many users do you have... And so on.
This is the wrong point, but you brought yourself into the situation. We are here for the slashdot article, especially the discussion of it, and your article. You got some negative feedback to the article, which might be correct or not.
I wish. I got tons of personal attacks, and amazingly little about the article.
But you take it personal and bring the discussion to the personal level.
What?
And you attack others ("where are your open source contributions?").
I did eventually get sick of anonymous cowards trying to discredit me in every possible way, yes.
Stop it. You're okay as everyone else here, even when nothing is contributed to open source. You should not define yourself by the contributions. Not by your code, not by your articles.
You are writing this without having read the comments. Once again: I only mentioned my repo when Anonymous Troll kept on trying, in every possible way, to discredit me, and saying "Who am I to even tell us what to do?" I wasn't telling ANYBODY not to use proprietary software. I was, as a free software developer, pointing out that Canonical was mixing free and non free software Al I pointed out, is that I would have liked them to give a filtering option. I care because I do develop free software.
Otherwise you take critique to your stuff as insult to your person. And if you publicly define yourself by your content, others will do so as well.
And when you have seperated the two, start accepting the (negative) feedback about your stuff
. Not everything must be as good as it was meant, not everything has to be good right at the start. You may improve, you may do better next, you may see that some people find it not as bad as the most people here.
I guess much stuff from your open source repos and so on is valued by many people, which is good. And if its only useful for yourself, the try to make it open for the case somebody's interested is good anyway. But do not bring this as defense for other stuff, which is not valued. You're mixing things and thus the critque and attacks mix up things as well. You do
Sorry you closed the tab. The overlay isn't there for any logged in user BTW. Goodbye.
After countless attempts by Anonymous Cowards to attach me in every possible way, and try anything to undermine myself as a person, when I point out what I actually did, I am suddenly saying that "I am the greatest", I am narcissistic, and that I am unable to accept critique?
This is becoming _grotesque_.
Yes, yes and yes. Thank you.
This is another comment that uses the same vocabulary, sentence structure and type of abuse as all of the other abusive comments.
No matter how hard you try, you do not represent Slashdot. Sorry.
I have the feeling that it's "The person who posts as Anonymous Cowards", rather than "people". I think there is one troll here making all the fuss. Same vocabulary, same style, same type of attacks... Or maybe I am just being hopeful!
:D