Why do people obsess over memory usage? Unused memory is wasted memory. If I have 2GB of RAM, I want it filled to the brim with cache until something more important needs it.
Veering a bit off topic there but I'll bite, liberalism runs off emotion like jet fuel?!
Absolutely. Liberalism is about placing "compassion" above practicality, instituting laws that make you feel good regardless of their effectiveness. Did you know paper recycling plants use more energy and pollute the environment more than simply throwing paper away and planting new trees to cut down? But because environmentalists feed off the emotion of "feeling good," it doesn't matter whether it's actually practical or effective because if someone questions it, they will be branded as an evil scourge.
We've got a conservative president who got reelected on nothing more than scaring the public into voting for him.
No, Bush got re-elected because nobody liked Kerry or his shifting positions.
If you elect my opponent the terrorists will come over here and kill your sons and rape your daughters. There is no logic or rationality to his basic stump speech of "Terrorists, terrorists, terrorits. 9/11, 9/11. God Bless America."
Democrats used the exact same scare tactics, telling us we were more at risk than before 9/11 because of Bush. Do you remember Kerry going on and on about insecure ports? By the way, I don't recall Bush ever saying our sons and daughters would be killed and raped if he wasn't elected.
All humanity runs off of emotion, we are emotional beings. Those that can separate themselves from emotion and think dispassionately are all too rare. The world would be a much better place if there were more of those people, especially in leadership positions. Since the average emotional American finds that type of person distant and cold though I doubt we're going to see many of them get elected. Conservatives and liberals alike stoke emotions to get what they want. I will agree with the rest of what you wrote though, schools don't teach much in the way of logic or rationality and it's all of our loss. And political correctness, gods, if children had simply been raised properly, to be polite, we might have never needed to invent the phrase.
Political correctness is a doublespeak tactic to change something into something else. For instance, changing "illegal aliens" into "undocumented workers." Liberals decided calling them illegal aliens sounded too harsh and wanted something that didn't seem illegal or wrong at all. It would be as silly as call a bank robbery an "undocumented transaction." Orwell wrote about this very tactic, changing negative things into perceived positives so that bad was no longer bad, but "ungood." This would confuse people's moral standards so that they could more easily be made to accept something they would normally be opposed to.
Both sides do it--look at pro-life groups versus pro-choice groups. The conflict is anti-abortion versus pro-abortion, but each side adopted doublespeak to spin their label into a more positive one and distract the issue so that instead of debating abortion, you're debating "choice" or "life," and if you oppose one of those positions then you must clearly be opposed to having choices or saving lives. It's bullshit doublespeak.
I think that kids shows today are less about "learning" in the traditional sense and more about teaching (very worthy) goals of tolerance and acceptance.
Society today seems to have shifted toward teaching emotions rather than logic and rationality. Have you noticed that reporters often ask someone "How do you feel about..?" Isn't it interesting that they're not asking "What do you think about...?" Just a funny little indicator of how emotions have taken over as the accepted veil to see the world through. I blame political correctness and liberalism, which runs off emotion like jet fuel.
During an interview with InformationWeek, Brian Croll, senior director of product marketing for the Mac OS, said, "ZFS is not happening," when asked whether Sun's Zettabyte File System would be in Leopard. Instead, Leopard would use Apple's current hierarchical file system, called HFS+. The Apple file system was first introduced in 1998 in Mac OS 8.0.
What he declined to comment on was the comment made by the Sun executive, but he did comment on ZFS itself.
A classic Slashdot tactic is to accuse someone you disagree with of "trolling." I am not trolling. I'm just stating the truth about piracy, which has been spun over the years into some goofy moral crusade against copyright instead of being describe as what it actually is--selfish people scrambling to get stuff for free before they get caught. It's an entitlement culture.
First off, Nobody has a god-given right to profit.
What on Earth does this have to do with the argument? Obviously if an album isn't good, it won't sell. I'm not even sure what you think you're responding to with this statement because it has nothing to do with piracy. What someone does have a right to is compensation for their work, so if you take their work, you have to pay them for it. Otherwise, it's slavery.
In other words, you don't have a god-given right to their music.
Just because someone has taken the time to create it, doesn't mean they should be allowed to limit my freedom to use or copy it as I want.
If your ideas of freedom to use or copy it extend to distributing it over P2P networks, then you are infringing on their freedoms and rights.
Copyright is actually a very old idea. It existed as far back as in the Roman empire. Back in those days, it was mostly used in books. Just like today, books were written by authors. But unlike today, making a copy of a book, could involve one or more highly educated slaves, slaving for a year or more. Needless to say, books were quite expensive. In such a system, arguing that the author should receive a fair share whenever a new copy was produced, is not particulary hard.
Ah, and here we go. I knew somebody would use this classic tactic--change the debate from the morality of making sure an artist doesn't get paid to a history lesson on copyright and how it's "antiquated" or "obsolete" or "dead." Which, of course, isn't true since the GPL relies on copyright. It also has nothing to do with the topic of the discussion--the immorality of making sure an artist doesn't get paid when you take their work.
Actually, since today it is cheaper to produce a copy of some intellectual property, than it is to enjoy it (I can copy a CD much faster than I can listen to it), artificially restricting copying of content seems completely backwards. Why should the public accept such completely silly laws?
What does the time it takes to listen to something have to do with anything?! Does that mean fine wine should be worth 25 cents because I can drink it really fast? Products are priced based on the value assigned to them by market demand, not by their production costs or consumption duration. You're just using more distraction tactics to make sure people aren't discussing the artists. We've gone from scapegoating the RIAA to scapegoating copyright. You pirates are deathly afraid of discussing the human beings you're ripping off because it paints your movement in a bad light--a light you've worked very hard to avoid by blaming the RIAA as much as you possibly could.
Even if we can agree in principle, that it would be nice if artists got paid, that doesn't mean we must agree that copyright is the way to do it. Actually, it doesn't even mean that artists must get paid, it just means we would prefer a system that does so.
Wow. Just wow. "It would be nice if artists got paid." At least you admit that you're okay having artistic slaves putting out work with no compensation so that you selfish pirates can enjoy it for free, as if you have some right to it.
But even so, a system that puts what looks like completely arbitrary restrictions on copying of content (that would otherwise be essentially free), is not something that can survive for long into the future. Copyright is dead!
Yep, welcome to PC gaming today. It's all about tech demos and graphics rather than actual gameplay. You even mentioned the most recent example, Oblivion, which was a crippled McRPG with crappy faces and repetitive terrain. And mouthbreathers like you will shell hundreds of dollars to play these tech demos, until you get bored again and need to shell out hundreds of dollars to play the next one. No wonder PC gaming is completely in the dumps compared to 10 and even 5 years ago.
Uh, Unreal Tournament 2007 and Starcraft 2 will have Mac versions. You weren't modded troll for being right, you were modded troll for being stupid and uninformed. But enjoy your frilly DX10 plants.
This is yet another step in Slashdot's pro-piracy campaign. Its goal is to make pirates feel better about themselves for ripping artists off. By never mentioning the artists in any of these articles, their existence is gradually pushed out of people's minds so that it feels like you're not pirating artists' music--you're pirating the RIAA's music. And because the RIAA is portrayed as evil because they dare go after lawbreakers infringing on their rights (the nerve!), it's okay, right?
In truth, you're ripping artists off. Real human beings who willingly signed contracts with record labels because labels have superior marketing and distribution channels as well as promotional abilities to make sure your album has a chance to sell. Pirates don't want to think about the artists, so instead we're given more loopy, anti-corporate bullshit about how bad the RIAA supposedly is because they shut down infringers--which is exactly what Slashdotters were calling for in 2000 during the Napster lawsuits.
That's right, everyone said they should go after individual infringers. So why has everyone changed their stance once the RIAA finally started doing that? Because nobody thought they could pull it off--lots of comments were made about how it would be unenforceable. In truth, you guys were just comforting yourselves that piracy would continue to thrive, and you could continue to get stuff for free that you didn't work or pay for. You were throwing out the "individual infringers" remark to portray yourselves as being in favor of combatting piracy while secretly hoping it would survive.
Fuck that. Piracy sucks. You guys bitch and complain when GPL code is "stolen." You call on the FSF to sue people all the time. But when the RIAA shuts down piracy rings or sends letters to people they caught infringing? Boo hoo, the evil RIAA is at it again!
I wonder how many of you would work for a boss who withheld your paycheck because he decided to use the code you wrote without paying you for it. After all, it's not "theft"--he's not taking physical property from you, right? I'm sure John Carmack and other important Slashdot geeks are oh-so-happy for you to be taking their money.
Suck it up and admit what you do. You make sure artists don't get paid. You presume "someone else" will pay them for it through t-shirts, concerts, or whatever goofy justifications you've concocted in your minds to ease your moral concerns.
I'm so tired of people constantly measuring memory usage. You're SUPPOSED to be using all your memory, or it's just wasted memory. The more that's cached, the better. If something else more important needs that memory, the OS will free it and allocate it to them. You don't have to worry about it.
No, they were nailed for illegally leveraging their monopoly to prevent competitors from entering the market. For instance, by threatening OEMs who bundled competing applications on new computers. Apple isn't preventing competing products by bundling their own downloads together. Unfortunately, the Microsoft antitrust trial has given people this paranoia about bundling anything. Though it got a lot of Slashdot coverage at the time, the IE bundle into Windows was just one factor in a pattern of behavior.
And in the meantime, we console gamers wonder when you shooter-playing high schoolers will run out of money for your yearly $3500 neon-lit Dell upgrades whose sole purpose for existence is to run content-lacking tech demos that win "Game of the Year" awards from paid press outlets. It's you guys who have let gaming communities run themselves into the ground by turning gaming into an ever-shrinking, expensive tech niche with no mainstream appeal.
When you're waiting in line for your $400 video card to draw frilly plants on screen so you can feel all hardcore for running DirectX 10, I'll be blasting away in Metroid Prime 3 or perhaps grinding in World of Warcraft on my MacBook.
Bigger question, does this article mean the "security through obscurity" argument people throw at systems like OS X is bullshit? Apache servers outnumber IIS, yet IIS gets twice as owned.
What a load of trite, anti-American bullshit. The U.S. didn't get rich off the expenses of other countries, not anymore than every single other country in the fucking world has. It's called economy, nature, survival of the fittest, etc. Since you're almost sure to be a college student, here's a clue--it doesn't make you witty and intellectual to "go against the grain" and bash the top successes of the world.
See, going from Windows XP to Vista is a very radical change, like moving from "classic" MacOS to OSX.
No, it's not. Vista comes from Windows Server 2003's codebase, and 2003 came from XP. It's the same old Win32 code running on an updated NT foundation. Mac OS Classic and OS X, however, are two completely different operating systems. OS X derives from OpenStep and CoreFoundation, while OS Classic comes from the old System software dating back to 1984.
Making "the Sims meets SimCity" is trying something new? What crack are you smoking? Trying something new would involve not tacking on the name of an established franchise to a hybrid spin-off.
I was under the impression that the GPL license is mostly meant for "hobby" developers that want to make sure no one abuses their code to earn money on time they donate for the good of mankind.
But I thought copyright infringement was okay, and that anybody trying to enforce the law was an evil cartel? Or is our position on this self-serving?
And god bless them for it. It's the reason their platform is famous for its degree of simplicity, stability, and high quality. I'm not really interested in whatever backwater goofball app you'd concoct that would crash my iPhone.
Slashdot Mirror
Why do people obsess over memory usage? Unused memory is wasted memory. If I have 2GB of RAM, I want it filled to the brim with cache until something more important needs it.
Because they focus on elegant interfaces that don't spam you with junk you rarely click.
Absolutely. Liberalism is about placing "compassion" above practicality, instituting laws that make you feel good regardless of their effectiveness. Did you know paper recycling plants use more energy and pollute the environment more than simply throwing paper away and planting new trees to cut down? But because environmentalists feed off the emotion of "feeling good," it doesn't matter whether it's actually practical or effective because if someone questions it, they will be branded as an evil scourge.
No, Bush got re-elected because nobody liked Kerry or his shifting positions.
Democrats used the exact same scare tactics, telling us we were more at risk than before 9/11 because of Bush. Do you remember Kerry going on and on about insecure ports? By the way, I don't recall Bush ever saying our sons and daughters would be killed and raped if he wasn't elected.
Political correctness is a doublespeak tactic to change something into something else. For instance, changing "illegal aliens" into "undocumented workers." Liberals decided calling them illegal aliens sounded too harsh and wanted something that didn't seem illegal or wrong at all. It would be as silly as call a bank robbery an "undocumented transaction." Orwell wrote about this very tactic, changing negative things into perceived positives so that bad was no longer bad, but "ungood." This would confuse people's moral standards so that they could more easily be made to accept something they would normally be opposed to.
Both sides do it--look at pro-life groups versus pro-choice groups. The conflict is anti-abortion versus pro-abortion, but each side adopted doublespeak to spin their label into a more positive one and distract the issue so that instead of debating abortion, you're debating "choice" or "life," and if you oppose one of those positions then you must clearly be opposed to having choices or saving lives. It's bullshit doublespeak.
Society today seems to have shifted toward teaching emotions rather than logic and rationality. Have you noticed that reporters often ask someone "How do you feel about..?" Isn't it interesting that they're not asking "What do you think about...?" Just a funny little indicator of how emotions have taken over as the accepted veil to see the world through. I blame political correctness and liberalism, which runs off emotion like jet fuel.
What he declined to comment on was the comment made by the Sun executive, but he did comment on ZFS itself.
A classic Slashdot tactic is to accuse someone you disagree with of "trolling." I am not trolling. I'm just stating the truth about piracy, which has been spun over the years into some goofy moral crusade against copyright instead of being describe as what it actually is--selfish people scrambling to get stuff for free before they get caught. It's an entitlement culture.
What on Earth does this have to do with the argument? Obviously if an album isn't good, it won't sell. I'm not even sure what you think you're responding to with this statement because it has nothing to do with piracy. What someone does have a right to is compensation for their work, so if you take their work, you have to pay them for it. Otherwise, it's slavery.
In other words, you don't have a god-given right to their music.
If your ideas of freedom to use or copy it extend to distributing it over P2P networks, then you are infringing on their freedoms and rights.
Ah, and here we go. I knew somebody would use this classic tactic--change the debate from the morality of making sure an artist doesn't get paid to a history lesson on copyright and how it's "antiquated" or "obsolete" or "dead." Which, of course, isn't true since the GPL relies on copyright. It also has nothing to do with the topic of the discussion--the immorality of making sure an artist doesn't get paid when you take their work.
What does the time it takes to listen to something have to do with anything?! Does that mean fine wine should be worth 25 cents because I can drink it really fast? Products are priced based on the value assigned to them by market demand, not by their production costs or consumption duration. You're just using more distraction tactics to make sure people aren't discussing the artists. We've gone from scapegoating the RIAA to scapegoating copyright. You pirates are deathly afraid of discussing the human beings you're ripping off because it paints your movement in a bad light--a light you've worked very hard to avoid by blaming the RIAA as much as you possibly could.
Wow. Just wow. "It would be nice if artists got paid." At least you admit that you're okay having artistic slaves putting out work with no compensation so that you selfish pirates can enjoy it for free, as if you have some right to it.
Yep, welcome to PC gaming today. It's all about tech demos and graphics rather than actual gameplay. You even mentioned the most recent example, Oblivion, which was a crippled McRPG with crappy faces and repetitive terrain. And mouthbreathers like you will shell hundreds of dollars to play these tech demos, until you get bored again and need to shell out hundreds of dollars to play the next one. No wonder PC gaming is completely in the dumps compared to 10 and even 5 years ago.
Uh, Unreal Tournament 2007 and Starcraft 2 will have Mac versions. You weren't modded troll for being right, you were modded troll for being stupid and uninformed. But enjoy your frilly DX10 plants.
This is yet another step in Slashdot's pro-piracy campaign. Its goal is to make pirates feel better about themselves for ripping artists off. By never mentioning the artists in any of these articles, their existence is gradually pushed out of people's minds so that it feels like you're not pirating artists' music--you're pirating the RIAA's music. And because the RIAA is portrayed as evil because they dare go after lawbreakers infringing on their rights (the nerve!), it's okay, right?
In truth, you're ripping artists off. Real human beings who willingly signed contracts with record labels because labels have superior marketing and distribution channels as well as promotional abilities to make sure your album has a chance to sell. Pirates don't want to think about the artists, so instead we're given more loopy, anti-corporate bullshit about how bad the RIAA supposedly is because they shut down infringers--which is exactly what Slashdotters were calling for in 2000 during the Napster lawsuits.
That's right, everyone said they should go after individual infringers. So why has everyone changed their stance once the RIAA finally started doing that? Because nobody thought they could pull it off--lots of comments were made about how it would be unenforceable. In truth, you guys were just comforting yourselves that piracy would continue to thrive, and you could continue to get stuff for free that you didn't work or pay for. You were throwing out the "individual infringers" remark to portray yourselves as being in favor of combatting piracy while secretly hoping it would survive.
Fuck that. Piracy sucks. You guys bitch and complain when GPL code is "stolen." You call on the FSF to sue people all the time. But when the RIAA shuts down piracy rings or sends letters to people they caught infringing? Boo hoo, the evil RIAA is at it again!
I wonder how many of you would work for a boss who withheld your paycheck because he decided to use the code you wrote without paying you for it. After all, it's not "theft"--he's not taking physical property from you, right? I'm sure John Carmack and other important Slashdot geeks are oh-so-happy for you to be taking their money.
Suck it up and admit what you do. You make sure artists don't get paid. You presume "someone else" will pay them for it through t-shirts, concerts, or whatever goofy justifications you've concocted in your minds to ease your moral concerns.
It is nit-picking. In fact, I can't think of a more worthless feature than a skinnable web browser.
I'm so tired of people constantly measuring memory usage. You're SUPPOSED to be using all your memory, or it's just wasted memory. The more that's cached, the better. If something else more important needs that memory, the OS will free it and allocate it to them. You don't have to worry about it.
Everyone please stop obsessing over memory usage.
No, they were nailed for illegally leveraging their monopoly to prevent competitors from entering the market. For instance, by threatening OEMs who bundled competing applications on new computers. Apple isn't preventing competing products by bundling their own downloads together. Unfortunately, the Microsoft antitrust trial has given people this paranoia about bundling anything. Though it got a lot of Slashdot coverage at the time, the IE bundle into Windows was just one factor in a pattern of behavior.
Thank god. What a waste of space.
Except that Safari is a better browser shell than Konq, and Carbon ports have nothing to do with Safari since it's a Cocoa application.
And in the meantime, we console gamers wonder when you shooter-playing high schoolers will run out of money for your yearly $3500 neon-lit Dell upgrades whose sole purpose for existence is to run content-lacking tech demos that win "Game of the Year" awards from paid press outlets. It's you guys who have let gaming communities run themselves into the ground by turning gaming into an ever-shrinking, expensive tech niche with no mainstream appeal.
When you're waiting in line for your $400 video card to draw frilly plants on screen so you can feel all hardcore for running DirectX 10, I'll be blasting away in Metroid Prime 3 or perhaps grinding in World of Warcraft on my MacBook.
Then some folks should stop presenting it as such.
Bigger question, does this article mean the "security through obscurity" argument people throw at systems like OS X is bullshit? Apache servers outnumber IIS, yet IIS gets twice as owned.
Okay, we'll add that to the list of Slashdot predictions along with the iPod and iPod mini.
What a load of trite, anti-American bullshit. The U.S. didn't get rich off the expenses of other countries, not anymore than every single other country in the fucking world has. It's called economy, nature, survival of the fittest, etc. Since you're almost sure to be a college student, here's a clue--it doesn't make you witty and intellectual to "go against the grain" and bash the top successes of the world.
It's all up to Apple. And they have a huge fanbase that chooses their platforms specifically because of their high standards.
No, it's not. Vista comes from Windows Server 2003's codebase, and 2003 came from XP. It's the same old Win32 code running on an updated NT foundation. Mac OS Classic and OS X, however, are two completely different operating systems. OS X derives from OpenStep and CoreFoundation, while OS Classic comes from the old System software dating back to 1984.
The standard UNIX filesystem hierarchy FUCKING BLOWS. That said, Leopard will be UNIX certified.
Making "the Sims meets SimCity" is trying something new? What crack are you smoking? Trying something new would involve not tacking on the name of an established franchise to a hybrid spin-off.
But I thought copyright infringement was okay, and that anybody trying to enforce the law was an evil cartel? Or is our position on this self-serving?
And god bless them for it. It's the reason their platform is famous for its degree of simplicity, stability, and high quality. I'm not really interested in whatever backwater goofball app you'd concoct that would crash my iPhone.