If a package has 120MB of dependencies, then it's not a small package; it's a large package that's been broken up into many reusable parts. There's nothing that an operating system or package manager can do to reduce the amount of stuff you have to download other than include the dependencies in the initial install. I'm not sure what you're complaining about or expecting here.
"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, conn a ship, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve an equation, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects."
If you want to stick with Photoshop, that's absolutely fine; it's not like you're hurting the GIMP or the world of graphic design as a whole by doing so.
I find your claim of victimhood arrogant and unconvincing. I'm willing to bet that the vast majority of the people who have contributed to the GIMP aren't doing so to compete with Photoshop or to gain users, they're doing it to fulfill a desire for a quality free image manipulation program. If you don't like the resulting software or the way certain things about it work, whatever; apparently other people do. For example, as pointed out above by somebody else, inclusion of MDI would probably require significant changes to GTK and is a profoundly inelegant solution to a problem that should be handled by your window manager. It's just not worth the trouble.
OTOH, if you can point out things that are technically wrong, naive, shortsighted or inefficient (rather than just different from the way you'd like them to be), please share your thoughts so that they can be fixed. Nobody in their right mind would reject things that are objective improvements.
If I've interpreted your reference to alt text correctly, FF and Mozilla are doing the correct thing; tooltips for the alt attribute are an IEism. The proper way to get the same effect is to use title=""; alt is for alternative text to be displayed if the image isn't displayed.
I should also point out that as I mentioned before, that letter stated quite clearly that the West was being attacked in retaliation for the perceived assault on the Muslim world, not because "we are not Muslims ruled under Sharia Islamic law as part of an Islamic superstate".
You can dispute their true motives, but why should I take your word for what they believe over theirs?
First, in their minds, all of their complaints are legitimate. If we only address the ones we think are legitimate, they still won't be satisfied.
You're right to a point; however, "Islamism" isn't a monolith and there are plenty who will reject the more extreme points who currently support the rational ones. Addressing these points would certainly make me and others like me feel a lot better about US involvement in the rest of the world and less likely to oppose them. By ignoring their legitimate complaints about human rights abuses and rampant hypocrisy you're playing right into their hands; why give them any comfort at all?
Nazi Germany, the USSR, and the People's Republic of China far far excede the number of people that the US has killed by pretty much any measure I can think of.
Yep, that quote was a huge piece of hyperbole. What do you expect from a demagogue? It has a kernel of truth though; the next line was right on the money in its bitter sarcasm - "How many acts of oppression, tyranny and injustice have you carried out, O callers to freedom?"
Nobody is suggesting killing all Muslims.
Obviously you don't spend much time reading conservative American blogs.
My point is this; absolutely, most of the claims and demands made by Islamic fundamentalists are ludicrous. Some of them aren't.
Did you actually read that letter? It states the motives of the author quite clearly:
Why are we fighting and opposing you? The answer is very simple:
(1) Because you attacked us and continue to attack us.
(2) These tragedies and calamities are only a few examples of your oppression and aggression against us. It is commanded by our religion and intellect that the oppressed have a right to return the aggression. Do not await anything from us but Jihad, resistance and revenge. Is it in any way rational to expect that after America has attacked us for more than half a century, that we will then leave her to live in security and peace?!!
While I agree that plenty of his complaints about Western morality are those of a religious fanatic, he's got valid points;
Your law is the law of the rich and wealthy people, who hold sway in their political parties, and fund their election campaigns with their gifts.
... you have used your force to destroy mankind more than any other nation in history; not to defend principles and values, but to hasten to secure your interests and profits.... How many acts of oppression, tyranny and injustice have you carried out, O callers to freedom?
Your policy on prohibiting and forcibly removing weapons of mass destruction to ensure world peace: it only applies to those countries which you do not permit to possess such weapons.
You are the last ones to respect the resolutions and policies of International Law, yet you claim to want to selectively punish anyone else who does the same.
As for the war criminals which you censure and form criminal courts for - you shamelessly ask that your own are granted immunity!!
You have claimed to be the vanguards of Human Rights... However, all these things vanished when the Mujahideen hit you, and you then implemented the methods of the same documented governments that you used to curse. In America, you captured thousands the Muslims and Arabs, took them into custody with neither reason, court trial, nor even disclosing their names. You issued newer, harsher laws.
What happens in Guatanamo is a historical embarrassment to America and its values, and it screams into your faces - you hypocrites, "What is the value of your signature on any agreement or treaty?"
It's true, the author does goes off about converting to Islam and how we're all moral degenerates and how eeeevil the Jews are, but I at least am of the opinion that we should deal with their legitimate complaints before we throw up our hands and say "I guess they just hate us for our freedoms! We'll have to kill them all."
Assuming you're not just trolling and really have been living under a rock for the last 3 years, it's IE that has annoying and buggy support for CSS, DOM & friends. Standards exist and IE is eeeevil for not rendering them properly.
Not remotely lame, incredibly lame. Coloured scroll bars were introduced by IE and ignored by everone else for a reason; page authors shouldn't be able to control the user's browser interface.
He didn't say people hate Americans because they can't spell, he said this misspelling is an example of the willful and uncaring ignorance that ticks off the rest of the world.
I BELIEVE I'm not living in some construct similar to "The Matrix" but how can any of us prove otherwise? I certainly don't believe that, but honestly... what proof do we have?
It doesn't make the slightest difference if we're all brains-in-vats. If it's unprovable then obviously the universe works exactly as it would without virtual reality conspiracies, so why entertain the notion in the first place?
It can't be proven, no - but that's the way science works; inductive reason and all that. Given the evidence, it seems fairly obvious to me that evolution is the most likely explanation for the diversity of life on Earth. If you have a better theory, please propose it.
Slashdot Mirror
Some sort of Linux loader? Hmmm, that's an interesting idea.
Actually I use Gentoo, so I guess I had just assumed that other systems offered something similar to USE="". If they don't, I'd say they're lacking.
If a package has 120MB of dependencies, then it's not a small package; it's a large package that's been broken up into many reusable parts. There's nothing that an operating system or package manager can do to reduce the amount of stuff you have to download other than include the dependencies in the initial install. I'm not sure what you're complaining about or expecting here.
Heheheh, how does that explain Slashdot? Neither good design nor good HTML.
If you want to stick with Photoshop, that's absolutely fine; it's not like you're hurting the GIMP or the world of graphic design as a whole by doing so.
I find your claim of victimhood arrogant and unconvincing. I'm willing to bet that the vast majority of the people who have contributed to the GIMP aren't doing so to compete with Photoshop or to gain users, they're doing it to fulfill a desire for a quality free image manipulation program. If you don't like the resulting software or the way certain things about it work, whatever; apparently other people do. For example, as pointed out above by somebody else, inclusion of MDI would probably require significant changes to GTK and is a profoundly inelegant solution to a problem that should be handled by your window manager. It's just not worth the trouble.
OTOH, if you can point out things that are technically wrong, naive, shortsighted or inefficient (rather than just different from the way you'd like them to be), please share your thoughts so that they can be fixed. Nobody in their right mind would reject things that are objective improvements.
If I've interpreted your reference to alt text correctly, FF and Mozilla are doing the correct thing; tooltips for the alt attribute are an IEism. The proper way to get the same effect is to use title=""; alt is for alternative text to be displayed if the image isn't displayed.
It's not so much the non-standardness that causes the problem to appear as the abuse-of-tablesness.
Anymore? You could before and the functionality just disappeared? Excuse me for being skeptical.
Have you tried 'date -s MMDDhhmm'?
I should also point out that as I mentioned before, that letter stated quite clearly that the West was being attacked in retaliation for the perceived assault on the Muslim world, not because "we are not Muslims ruled under Sharia Islamic law as part of an Islamic superstate".
You can dispute their true motives, but why should I take your word for what they believe over theirs?
You're right to a point; however, "Islamism" isn't a monolith and there are plenty who will reject the more extreme points who currently support the rational ones. Addressing these points would certainly make me and others like me feel a lot better about US involvement in the rest of the world and less likely to oppose them. By ignoring their legitimate complaints about human rights abuses and rampant hypocrisy you're playing right into their hands; why give them any comfort at all?
Yep, that quote was a huge piece of hyperbole. What do you expect from a demagogue? It has a kernel of truth though; the next line was right on the money in its bitter sarcasm - "How many acts of oppression, tyranny and injustice have you carried out, O callers to freedom?"
Obviously you don't spend much time reading conservative American blogs.
My point is this; absolutely, most of the claims and demands made by Islamic fundamentalists are ludicrous. Some of them aren't.
Did you actually read that letter? It states the motives of the author quite clearly:
While I agree that plenty of his complaints about Western morality are those of a religious fanatic, he's got valid points;
It's true, the author does goes off about converting to Islam and how we're all moral degenerates and how eeeevil the Jews are, but I at least am of the opinion that we should deal with their legitimate complaints before we throw up our hands and say "I guess they just hate us for our freedoms! We'll have to kill them all."
Assuming you're not just trolling and really have been living under a rock for the last 3 years, it's IE that has annoying and buggy support for CSS, DOM & friends. Standards exist and IE is eeeevil for not rendering them properly.
Not remotely lame, incredibly lame. Coloured scroll bars were introduced by IE and ignored by everone else for a reason; page authors shouldn't be able to control the user's browser interface.
What's eerie? AFAICT XAML is a XUL ripoff (ok that's a strong word, but they're pretty much the same thing).
Reading further I see that it's already been leaked online, so there'd be not much point.
He didn't say people hate Americans because they can't spell, he said this misspelling is an example of the willful and uncaring ignorance that ticks off the rest of the world.
It doesn't bother me that you disagree with me, it bothers me that you have so many misconceptions about what we're disagreeing on.
It doesn't make the slightest difference if we're all brains-in-vats. If it's unprovable then obviously the universe works exactly as it would without virtual reality conspiracies, so why entertain the notion in the first place?
It can't be proven, no - but that's the way science works; inductive reason and all that. Given the evidence, it seems fairly obvious to me that evolution is the most likely explanation for the diversity of life on Earth. If you have a better theory, please propose it.