Straight FTP is flat-out faster than BitTorrent if the server operators can afford the bandwidth. The issue is that they just plain can't afford the bandwidth. BitTorrent results in their bandwidth usage during peak times reducing to about a tenth what it would be, which prevents them from crashing and gives you a slight slowdown in slow times for a huge speed increase during peak times.
When the US originally declared independence and flat-out ignored all the restrictions Europe tried to place on such things.
The US declared independence in 1776. Edison was born in 1847. By the time Edison was patenting things, the US was among the richest countries in the world. It still had a long way to go to where it is today, but it was doing quite well.
Also, the US ignored it's own patents when Edison was around. Edison had patents on the camera which is why Hollywood is on the west coast: they didn't want to pay any patent royalties so they just avoided his collectors.
It's interesting to note that, as India is an even bigger proponent of these freedoms than China, that the real champions of intellectual property freedoms are those in rising third world nations. This is the exact same position the US was in when it began its rise and it is interesting to consider that the economic situation of the country could so outstrip the cultural components in this manner. If you compare the three places, there are extremely few similarities, yet they all chose the same path when in the same situation.
It's worth noting that Neil Gaiman also signed on to do the rewrites, so the changes they make will be going largely through him. Also, Zemeckis and the others working on it are usually good, so I wouldn't give up hope just yet.
Games are great for teaching somebody how something works in a once-through, overview sort of manner. It's like reading every header in a textbook but with tripple the chance of remembering it.
On the other hand, games suck for looking stuff up, which is where textbooks excell. Also, a good textbook is far better in terms of brevity. It's like comparing doing an experiment to reading about it. You want to do some experiments, yes, but I'd really rather not test relativity myself.
I'll keep my textbooks and my easy-to-look-up data, thank you.
The Concorde was grounded because it was found to have a single-point failure, which also happens to be what cause that crash. It was marginalized by the lobbies before that, but it would have been taken out entirely when that was found, regardless.
While a president is in office is THE time to comment on them. After they're out of office, it doesn't really matter anymore if they're a horrible person. It's not as much a matter of being unamerican by not insulting the president, it's a matter of being stupid.
For that matter, why would anyone make an installation system that had GTK as a dependency? Then, it would never look nice under KDE, so why even bother?
Most likely, they just didn't bother to make it work with anything until it was good enough that this fact even mattered.
"Just a question here, what would Microsoft have to do for you to consider them to be a friendly corporation, rather than an evil and menacing corporate giant? I kind of like them already, but I know I'm unusual in that regard."
That's a good question. I'm thinking that there are about four things:
[1] Follow standards properly. This wouldn't be nearly so irritating as it is if not for one thing: MS had a large amount of say in almost all of those standards. MS is such a huge software company, it gets some say in basically every standard that is put together. (I won't note interoperability separately, as this is the main issue for me, but opening up their own formats is also a big part of this issue.)
[2] Oppose software patents, or at least do something like IBM did with opening them to OSS. That counts for a lot in my book, as I really think software patents are a big deal. And, until some move like that is made, all these patents they are getting are really scary.
[3] Don't FUD. MicroSoft has a tendency to just badmouth Linux for lack of any other tactic. That just makes me sick. When I actually looked at their "Get the Facts" campaign, I was appalled by how bad the studies were, and all for a technically true tagline which sounded good, even if it didn't really matter.
[4] Time. This one is the hardest for MicroSoft to do. MS has done so much wrong that I won't trust them again until they have shown themselves to be trustworthy in the long run. For a good comparison, look to IBM. They were the last big computer monopoly. They were big and scary, although not as bad as MS. They're only recently getting through this 'time' issue. In another four or five years, I may genuinely like and trust them, as opposed to just thinking they are being useful right now.
I'm sure there's more, but that's what came to mind for me.
Well, it was funny to me, in the ironic sense, which is why I wrote it. And, for those who wished to think more carefully on the subject, they would likely have realized that the things I do that require the internet only require it because I am an avid internet user and a less technical user, what this story was about, would not be in such a predicament.
Frustrated users that are sick of the internet really might as well just give it up. You don't need it. I've gone by for a month without it and that left me much more productive (except at those things I do which depend on the internet). You DO have better things to do with your time.
Wasn't Ballmer the one who spewed things like "Linux is a cancer"?
I wouldn't say Ballmer is "gentle". More like, uhm... big, loud, incoherent and jumps up and down a lot?
They may seem rather uncouth at the moment, but thinking back definitely reveals that this is their 'gentler' side, even if it is not particularly gentle.
"Unfortunately... we're known as a legal defendant"
Better that than being known as litigitous, we-bulldoze-over-everyone-in-our-way bastards. Oh wait...
Microsoft does not have a reputation for being litigious, and with good reason. They almost always try to avoid using the courts. Instead, they just buy out and/or destroy their rivals in a more free-form forum. Call them evil and vile all you want, but they are not yet litigious.
Just in case you actually cared, KDE 4 will be able to use a pixel shader for rendering the menu. And, assuming both KDE 4 and Longhorn are on time, KDE 4 will come out first. And, seeing as KDE has made its last several releases to within a few weeks, it seems likely that at least KDE will be on time.
So, overall, I quite agree with you. Those slackers over at MS have some real explaining to do about why they'll be the last OS to have any real hardware acceleration.
I'm actually most excited because this means that, in not too long, people will start really working on KDE 4.0. That's the release I want. 3.4 is a finalization of the 3's, really. It's got some nice cleanup of what's there and will run a little better, but almost all the features that were ever going into the 3's are already there.
"Aren't anti-aliased fonts a basic feature of any modern desktop environment?"
Yes, they are a basic feature. However, they in no way relate to the desktop functioning well. If you don't have them, nothing will slow down or be left useless. By contrast, many programs actually depend on ghostscript, so it is recommended. Without it, the desktop still runs, although some programs will not.
Did you ever consider that saying you stopped accepting that the core of everything they believe in and the basis of everything they do had any value might be inherently hostile?
I didn't consider that, and now that you mention it, I don't think so. Christian believers (and nihilists and psychopaths for other parts of my post) are free to take offense at anything I may say, but no hostility was intended, nor would a thoughtful Christian take offence at my "uneducated position" on the matter.
Sorry. I didn't intend to sound so rude or to set off so many flames. I can see how you might not think the comment is hostile, but I still think it comes across as being openly opposed to Christianity. I guess we'll just have to disagree on that one.
A Christian believer labels the subject that we disagree upon as central to their view of existence and meaning.
I didn't say I disagreed with those 'lemmas' you commented on. I don't disagree with them and they don't disagree with Christianity. All I said was that "I just stopped accepting that there was a need for God" is hostile to anyone who believes God is their reason for living. Don't put words in my mouth.
They continue to exert their own agency when they choose to become offended by disagreement with their own unproven (and unevidenced) assertions. Some will, most won't.
Considering that you basically outright admitted that there is no 'proof' for your own assertions, just that you think they are reasonable and should be accepted, this argument is completely unreasonable.
The wise person would look behind their own injured sensibilities before becoming truly upset. But not all people are wise.
The wise person would read what he was responding to and see if there were any claims of injured sensibilities before stating that there were. I informed you that I felt your comment was hostile despite your claims to not being hostile, as I thought you might want to know why many Christians might not enjoy arguing with you on points such as these. You seemed the sort of person who would want to know if he was being unintentionally offensive. I'm sorry that I was wrong on that count.
(BTW, if you want to label me with a belief system, the Taoists and I agree on lots and lots of things).
I don't want to label you with a belief system and I can't possibly imagine how such a comment as this even relates to what I said.
Make it more difficult for those who only make software to compete with open-source, moving the software realm further to being primarily valuable to solutions companies, of which they are the most successful.
"Yes, I am an athiest. No, I'm not hostile to Christianity or Christians: I just stopped accepting that there was a need for God and lost interest (except as a hobby of studying myth in literature and culture)."
Did you ever consider that saying you stopped accepting that the core of everything they believe in and the basis of everything they do had any value might be inherently hostile?
Ask yourself if this is at all hostile: "It's not that I'm hostile to you, I just don't think that the reasons behind anything you have to say matter in the slightest, except possibly as a hobby."
Slashdot Mirror
What scriptwriting tools did you get for word?
Maybe I or someone else here could buy a copy and see how they work to create a replacement for you.
Straight FTP is flat-out faster than BitTorrent if the server operators can afford the bandwidth. The issue is that they just plain can't afford the bandwidth. BitTorrent results in their bandwidth usage during peak times reducing to about a tenth what it would be, which prevents them from crashing and gives you a slight slowdown in slow times for a huge speed increase during peak times.
Ummm...Japanese? The guys that have been in a recession for thirty straight years? Don't you mean Hindi?
"fascist? No. There is no segment of the population that is systematically persecuted or denied equality."
"murderous? No. China has not invaded another country for the last 200 years. It has not massacred it's indigenous populations."
Perhaps you should go visit Tibet sometime.
When the US originally declared independence and flat-out ignored all the restrictions Europe tried to place on such things.
The US declared independence in 1776. Edison was born in 1847. By the time Edison was patenting things, the US was among the richest countries in the world. It still had a long way to go to where it is today, but it was doing quite well.
Also, the US ignored it's own patents when Edison was around. Edison had patents on the camera which is why Hollywood is on the west coast: they didn't want to pay any patent royalties so they just avoided his collectors.
It's interesting to note that, as India is an even bigger proponent of these freedoms than China, that the real champions of intellectual property freedoms are those in rising third world nations. This is the exact same position the US was in when it began its rise and it is interesting to consider that the economic situation of the country could so outstrip the cultural components in this manner. If you compare the three places, there are extremely few similarities, yet they all chose the same path when in the same situation.
It's worth noting that Neil Gaiman also signed on to do the rewrites, so the changes they make will be going largely through him. Also, Zemeckis and the others working on it are usually good, so I wouldn't give up hope just yet.
Games are great for teaching somebody how something works in a once-through, overview sort of manner. It's like reading every header in a textbook but with tripple the chance of remembering it.
On the other hand, games suck for looking stuff up, which is where textbooks excell. Also, a good textbook is far better in terms of brevity. It's like comparing doing an experiment to reading about it. You want to do some experiments, yes, but I'd really rather not test relativity myself.
I'll keep my textbooks and my easy-to-look-up data, thank you.
The Concorde was grounded because it was found to have a single-point failure, which also happens to be what cause that crash. It was marginalized by the lobbies before that, but it would have been taken out entirely when that was found, regardless.
While a president is in office is THE time to comment on them. After they're out of office, it doesn't really matter anymore if they're a horrible person. It's not as much a matter of being unamerican by not insulting the president, it's a matter of being stupid.
For that matter, why would anyone make an installation system that had GTK as a dependency? Then, it would never look nice under KDE, so why even bother?
Most likely, they just didn't bother to make it work with anything until it was good enough that this fact even mattered.
"Just a question here, what would Microsoft have to do for you to consider them to be a friendly corporation, rather than an evil and menacing corporate giant? I kind of like them already, but I know I'm unusual in that regard."
That's a good question. I'm thinking that there are about four things:
[1] Follow standards properly. This wouldn't be nearly so irritating as it is if not for one thing: MS had a large amount of say in almost all of those standards. MS is such a huge software company, it gets some say in basically every standard that is put together. (I won't note interoperability separately, as this is the main issue for me, but opening up their own formats is also a big part of this issue.)
[2] Oppose software patents, or at least do something like IBM did with opening them to OSS. That counts for a lot in my book, as I really think software patents are a big deal. And, until some move like that is made, all these patents they are getting are really scary.
[3] Don't FUD. MicroSoft has a tendency to just badmouth Linux for lack of any other tactic. That just makes me sick. When I actually looked at their "Get the Facts" campaign, I was appalled by how bad the studies were, and all for a technically true tagline which sounded good, even if it didn't really matter.
[4] Time. This one is the hardest for MicroSoft to do. MS has done so much wrong that I won't trust them again until they have shown themselves to be trustworthy in the long run. For a good comparison, look to IBM. They were the last big computer monopoly. They were big and scary, although not as bad as MS. They're only recently getting through this 'time' issue. In another four or five years, I may genuinely like and trust them, as opposed to just thinking they are being useful right now.
I'm sure there's more, but that's what came to mind for me.
KDE, I can see, but then keeping SuperKaramba and claiming you are cutting out frills is just bunk.
Gates is awful in an interview. No, seriously, his words and analogies were leaping all over the field and clusterfucking one another.
Well, it was funny to me, in the ironic sense, which is why I wrote it. And, for those who wished to think more carefully on the subject, they would likely have realized that the things I do that require the internet only require it because I am an avid internet user and a less technical user, what this story was about, would not be in such a predicament.
Frustrated users that are sick of the internet really might as well just give it up. You don't need it. I've gone by for a month without it and that left me much more productive (except at those things I do which depend on the internet). You DO have better things to do with your time.
They may seem rather uncouth at the moment, but thinking back definitely reveals that this is their 'gentler' side, even if it is not particularly gentle.
Microsoft does not have a reputation for being litigious, and with good reason. They almost always try to avoid using the courts. Instead, they just buy out and/or destroy their rivals in a more free-form forum. Call them evil and vile all you want, but they are not yet litigious.
Just in case you actually cared, KDE 4 will be able to use a pixel shader for rendering the menu. And, assuming both KDE 4 and Longhorn are on time, KDE 4 will come out first. And, seeing as KDE has made its last several releases to within a few weeks, it seems likely that at least KDE will be on time.
So, overall, I quite agree with you. Those slackers over at MS have some real explaining to do about why they'll be the last OS to have any real hardware acceleration.
Don't be proud about your success, but we dream of being as successful as you are.
I'm actually most excited because this means that, in not too long, people will start really working on KDE 4.0. That's the release I want. 3.4 is a finalization of the 3's, really. It's got some nice cleanup of what's there and will run a little better, but almost all the features that were ever going into the 3's are already there.
But 4.0...oh, I can hardly wait...
"Aren't anti-aliased fonts a basic feature of any modern desktop environment?"
Yes, they are a basic feature. However, they in no way relate to the desktop functioning well. If you don't have them, nothing will slow down or be left useless. By contrast, many programs actually depend on ghostscript, so it is recommended. Without it, the desktop still runs, although some programs will not.
Sorry. I didn't intend to sound so rude or to set off so many flames. I can see how you might not think the comment is hostile, but I still think it comes across as being openly opposed to Christianity. I guess we'll just have to disagree on that one.
I didn't say I disagreed with those 'lemmas' you commented on. I don't disagree with them and they don't disagree with Christianity. All I said was that "I just stopped accepting that there was a need for God" is hostile to anyone who believes God is their reason for living. Don't put words in my mouth.
Considering that you basically outright admitted that there is no 'proof' for your own assertions, just that you think they are reasonable and should be accepted, this argument is completely unreasonable.
The wise person would read what he was responding to and see if there were any claims of injured sensibilities before stating that there were. I informed you that I felt your comment was hostile despite your claims to not being hostile, as I thought you might want to know why many Christians might not enjoy arguing with you on points such as these. You seemed the sort of person who would want to know if he was being unintentionally offensive. I'm sorry that I was wrong on that count.
I don't want to label you with a belief system and I can't possibly imagine how such a comment as this even relates to what I said.
PS: Sorry for such a slow reply.
Other Possible Strategy:
Make it more difficult for those who only make software to compete with open-source, moving the software realm further to being primarily valuable to solutions companies, of which they are the most successful.
"Yes, I am an athiest. No, I'm not hostile to Christianity or Christians: I just stopped accepting that there was a need for God and lost interest (except as a hobby of studying myth in literature and culture)."
Did you ever consider that saying you stopped accepting that the core of everything they believe in and the basis of everything they do had any value might be inherently hostile?
Ask yourself if this is at all hostile: "It's not that I'm hostile to you, I just don't think that the reasons behind anything you have to say matter in the slightest, except possibly as a hobby."