"But if there's massive e-vote manipulation that throws the election to Bush, I think the opposite is likely to happen: there will be a massive clampdown by the GOP powers-that-be as they realize they can make our current one-party state a permanent affair, as long as they can keep their fake-election-toy under wraps."
I wouldn't be so sure. They may realize that, if they do it very much more, they'll get caught, and if they get caught, they'll get so utterly crushed it will be disgusting.
No voter fraud cases are being in any way instructed by anyone up-top. Most likely, those in positions even close to power don't even consider that the fraud could be happening. Most of the fraud is done by individuals on a lower level.
I see this a lot. I'm a Slackware user, so I don't have dependency control in a packaging system. And, I've never had a problem. Occasionally, when I build something from source, it complains something is missing, I download it, build it as well, then continue. This takes almost no time (sometimes the build takes time, but that is unavoidable if there are not binaries, regardless of the system).
So, my question is, is this dependency control thing actually a problem, or is it just theoretically a problem?
In case you were wondering, I am a Slackware user. And, if you had read the fucking article you would have realized that all of the distro-archetypes were comedic and sarcastic, you moron.
Slackware users are paradoxically obsessed with being cutting edge and traditional at the same time. They love to point out that their distro has all the latest programs, but explain that it's ancient installer is 'still up to the task' and that the lack of powerful package management 'leaves them in control'. Slackware users like to do things for themselves and tend to ignore what popular opinion (and logic and reason and all rational thought) says is good.
And, since they didn't include Fedora either, here's that one:
Fedora is synonymous with Red Hat, but many of its users believe that it isn't. The song of the king of the Linux street, Fedora is popular with those who want to be in the middle of the road, but leading the crowd. Unfortunately, they are actually be pushed along from behind, with the silly-hat men leading from behind. Fedora is very loyal to its customers, except when they want something that Red Hat doesn't, in which case they consider the feature risky.
For starters, window-shading was a wonderful tool they decided to cut.
I know it sounds pathetic to say I don't remember many, but I don't use MacOS-X at home, I use KDE. This is because I found MacOS-X detracted too far from my productivity because I couldn't just do stuff in a fast way, I had to do it their way.
MacOS-X is a single desktop environment. KDE is a single desktop environment. GNOME is a single desktop environment. The apps from any one look out-of-place on any of the others. If KDE were run on MacOS-X (the kernel) the MacOS-X (the DE) applications would look out-of-place.
That KDE and GNOME share several similar backends (Linux, FreeBSD, Irix, etcetera) does not in any way make them a single platform. The merely are two different platforms that interoperate well.
"For every one geeky thing that OS X can learn from KDE, there are fifty things that KDE can learn about design, usability, polish, and consistency from OS X."
Don't start going about MacOS-X usability until you really look into it a lot deeper. They went all out for high 'walk-up-and-use' value, but not so much for actual usability. Many of the OS-X choices detracted significantly from usability that was present in earlier versions, giving apparent usability rather than actual usability.
This isn't to say their choice was wrong, but they were targetting new users and home users, not pro users. In very many ways, KDE is far more usable than OS-X, it mostly just depends on how talented the user is and what they are trying to do.
I've always liked most of KDE's network transparency (you can see my other post for a comment on FTP) and always wished someone would make a KDE Shell. Imagine being at the shell prompt and just typing webdav://at.random.location and changing directories straight into the webdav server, seamlessly.
Since the KIO stuff already converts everything into a directory-style format, this should be possible; perhaps it even wouldn't be too difficult to put together.
Whatever the case, it would be cool to have the KDE suite of technologies available system-wide, even when I can't get X going.
For some reason, FTP never works well with KDE. It works fine if you have an anonymous login, but I have never been able to get it to open any of my other three ftp storage locations. 80% of other programs work PERFECTLY with them, and the other 20% can be tweaked until they do. Unfortunately, I can't even easily tweak the options for KDE so it will let me work with my files.
Considering that FTP is absolutely ancient, extremely widely used, and a mostly solved problem, this is rather sad.
I have serious concerns about anything shooting lasers into my eyes. I know, all screens are already projecting light into my eyes, but that is slightly different.
But, that instinctive fear aside, this could be really cool. I mean, small HUDs of high quality have been wanted for near-onto forever. Now, some of those Sci-Fi stories where nobody has monitors because they are useless might start to come true.
Some quick Google research revealed that the Rubik's Cube has colors of: Green, Blue, Orange, Yellow, White, and Red, all in as close to pure tones as possible. By contrast, the Magic Cube (http://shop.store.yahoo.com/opg/magiccube.html) has colors that are off-tones. Only three sides are visible in the image, and they are Fuschia, Teal, and Yellow.
Although the yellow overlaps with that in the Rubik's Cube (even if a few shades darker) the other colors are definitely different. Although the Magic Cube resembles the Rubik's Cube, they are clearly different in appearance. Seeing as having differently-colored sides is required for the Rubik's Cube to be functional, there is no way I can see that this trademark is reasonable.
Re:How did they decide?
on
Press freedom
·
· Score: 1
"But when have reporters ever looked deeper than a quote which they liked and which served their bias?"
You may not like reporters, but this is a disgusting insult to decades of dedicated investigative journalists which have risked life and reputation to bring the truth to the people.
Re:Americans talk about freedom
on
Press freedom
·
· Score: 1
The fact that people can send that to you without repurcussions is a further example of the freedom of the press.
Not My Usual "Freedom of the Press"
on
Press freedom
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
In general, it refers to how much freedom members of the press are given, not to how free speech/publication is. For example, the US is cited for trouble giving press visas, and the arrest of reporters during demonstrations. It makes no mention of any other restrictions on speech, no mention of a climate that is hostile to some forms of the press, no mention of the way that the president grants the media access and chooses questions.
The study seems to completely ignore non-official members of the press. A few years back, this would have been fine. However, the formality of the press is dispersing. Just look at the blogging community. That's the press. I think it's a useful metric, but definitely not the final statement on the issue.
The most interesting thing about these are that the natives of the island have many legends about people exactly fitting this description (three feet tall and humanoid) that are extremely detailed. The legends even include that these 'hobbits' had languages of their own.
First, this would be the first case of modern humans having even psuedo-recorded contact with another intelligent species.
Second, this rips back open the possibility of our faerie tales being more true than most of us would have expected.
Thank you for clearing that up. Now, I can confidently state that EULAs are in fact total bullshit, as opposed to just semi-confidently. Further, I can back it up a bit, which is really useful.
I agree with you that EULA's don't make sense, but as devil's advocate...
The consideration on an EULA would be, from the customer, that they lose the right to reverse engineer the product or to tamper with the product, and the consideration from the copyright holder would be permission to copy the game from the disk to the hard-drive.
I don't see where that fails the 'consideration' test, but I also am not a lawyer.
I think you misunderstand significantly. If you ever end up walking down a country road (which usually has no sidewalk) and have a car come at you, you will soon realize that, if they have the brights on YOU CANNOT SEE.
When a car comes at me with brights on, I have to cover my eyes and look down just so I can safely step off the road and wait for it to pass. Even with my hand over my eyes, I can only see my feet because the lights have made them shiny enough to blind me. At most places, the ground is insufficiently reflective so that I cannot see it and am left to hope that I don't step in a ditch or something. It is completely ridiculous.
That's a very misleading measurement. It's been noted many times before that the information AMD released was the max that the processor line would ever reach, not the current max. None of the current x86-64 processors actually hit that 89 watts.
It's even more of a double-standard than that. If you check 3rd Edition D&D, there are several races where women are superior to men, but NONE where men are superior to women. Only discrimination against males is acceptable.*
* I suppose I should note that, in their 'religious pantheons' the men still mostly run the show.
I think the author of the report is correct in many ways, he is far too biased. Besides being clearly in the Linux camp for a long time, he is very deceptive in his explanation of the operating systems. For example, he claims Windows is monolithic by design while Linux is modular by design, citing that you can't unentangle pieces like IE.
However, it is clear that Windows is monolithic in practice and modular by design, as all those pieces actually can be swapped, it just can't be reasonably done because of third-party programs and a lack of replacements.
Linux, by contrast, is designed with a mix of monolithic and modular, with some monolithic components which just don't budge (the Kernel, X) and many which can be swapped to high hell (browsers, desktops, mail readers).
There is a major distinction between being rainy and getting a lot of rainfall. Rainy applies no matter how much is actually coming down and can extend for days without much water actually coming down. However, actually rainfall is an exact matter that can come down over a very short period of time.
Slashdot Mirror
"But if there's massive e-vote manipulation that throws the election to Bush, I think the opposite is likely to happen: there will be a massive clampdown by the GOP powers-that-be as they realize they can make our current one-party state a permanent affair, as long as they can keep their fake-election-toy under wraps."
I wouldn't be so sure. They may realize that, if they do it very much more, they'll get caught, and if they get caught, they'll get so utterly crushed it will be disgusting.
No voter fraud cases are being in any way instructed by anyone up-top. Most likely, those in positions even close to power don't even consider that the fraud could be happening. Most of the fraud is done by individuals on a lower level.
"no dependency control, no thanks."
I see this a lot. I'm a Slackware user, so I don't have dependency control in a packaging system. And, I've never had a problem. Occasionally, when I build something from source, it complains something is missing, I download it, build it as well, then continue. This takes almost no time (sometimes the build takes time, but that is unavoidable if there are not binaries, regardless of the system).
So, my question is, is this dependency control thing actually a problem, or is it just theoretically a problem?
In case you were wondering, I am a Slackware user. And, if you had read the fucking article you would have realized that all of the distro-archetypes were comedic and sarcastic, you moron.
Since they didn't cover Slackware, here you go:
Slackware users are paradoxically obsessed with being cutting edge and traditional at the same time. They love to point out that their distro has all the latest programs, but explain that it's ancient installer is 'still up to the task' and that the lack of powerful package management 'leaves them in control'. Slackware users like to do things for themselves and tend to ignore what popular opinion (and logic and reason and all rational thought) says is good.
And, since they didn't include Fedora either, here's that one:
Fedora is synonymous with Red Hat, but many of its users believe that it isn't. The song of the king of the Linux street, Fedora is popular with those who want to be in the middle of the road, but leading the crowd. Unfortunately, they are actually be pushed along from behind, with the silly-hat men leading from behind. Fedora is very loyal to its customers, except when they want something that Red Hat doesn't, in which case they consider the feature risky.
For starters, window-shading was a wonderful tool they decided to cut.
I know it sounds pathetic to say I don't remember many, but I don't use MacOS-X at home, I use KDE. This is because I found MacOS-X detracted too far from my productivity because I couldn't just do stuff in a fast way, I had to do it their way.
You're still not really replying to the argument.
MacOS-X is a single desktop environment. KDE is a single desktop environment. GNOME is a single desktop environment. The apps from any one look out-of-place on any of the others. If KDE were run on MacOS-X (the kernel) the MacOS-X (the DE) applications would look out-of-place.
That KDE and GNOME share several similar backends (Linux, FreeBSD, Irix, etcetera) does not in any way make them a single platform. The merely are two different platforms that interoperate well.
"For every one geeky thing that OS X can learn from KDE, there are fifty things that KDE can learn about design, usability, polish, and consistency from OS X."
Don't start going about MacOS-X usability until you really look into it a lot deeper. They went all out for high 'walk-up-and-use' value, but not so much for actual usability. Many of the OS-X choices detracted significantly from usability that was present in earlier versions, giving apparent usability rather than actual usability.
This isn't to say their choice was wrong, but they were targetting new users and home users, not pro users. In very many ways, KDE is far more usable than OS-X, it mostly just depends on how talented the user is and what they are trying to do.
I've always liked most of KDE's network transparency (you can see my other post for a comment on FTP) and always wished someone would make a KDE Shell. Imagine being at the shell prompt and just typing webdav://at.random.location and changing directories straight into the webdav server, seamlessly.
Since the KIO stuff already converts everything into a directory-style format, this should be possible; perhaps it even wouldn't be too difficult to put together.
Whatever the case, it would be cool to have the KDE suite of technologies available system-wide, even when I can't get X going.
For some reason, FTP never works well with KDE. It works fine if you have an anonymous login, but I have never been able to get it to open any of my other three ftp storage locations. 80% of other programs work PERFECTLY with them, and the other 20% can be tweaked until they do. Unfortunately, I can't even easily tweak the options for KDE so it will let me work with my files.
Considering that FTP is absolutely ancient, extremely widely used, and a mostly solved problem, this is rather sad.
I have serious concerns about anything shooting lasers into my eyes. I know, all screens are already projecting light into my eyes, but that is slightly different.
But, that instinctive fear aside, this could be really cool. I mean, small HUDs of high quality have been wanted for near-onto forever. Now, some of those Sci-Fi stories where nobody has monitors because they are useless might start to come true.
Some quick Google research revealed that the Rubik's Cube has colors of: Green, Blue, Orange, Yellow, White, and Red, all in as close to pure tones as possible. By contrast, the Magic Cube (http://shop.store.yahoo.com/opg/magiccube.html) has colors that are off-tones. Only three sides are visible in the image, and they are Fuschia, Teal, and Yellow.
Although the yellow overlaps with that in the Rubik's Cube (even if a few shades darker) the other colors are definitely different. Although the Magic Cube resembles the Rubik's Cube, they are clearly different in appearance. Seeing as having differently-colored sides is required for the Rubik's Cube to be functional, there is no way I can see that this trademark is reasonable.
"But when have reporters ever looked deeper than a quote which they liked and which served their bias?"
You may not like reporters, but this is a disgusting insult to decades of dedicated investigative journalists which have risked life and reputation to bring the truth to the people.
The fact that people can send that to you without repurcussions is a further example of the freedom of the press.
In general, it refers to how much freedom members of the press are given, not to how free speech/publication is. For example, the US is cited for trouble giving press visas, and the arrest of reporters during demonstrations. It makes no mention of any other restrictions on speech, no mention of a climate that is hostile to some forms of the press, no mention of the way that the president grants the media access and chooses questions.
The study seems to completely ignore non-official members of the press. A few years back, this would have been fine. However, the formality of the press is dispersing. Just look at the blogging community. That's the press. I think it's a useful metric, but definitely not the final statement on the issue.
Yeah it does good on SPEC (page 8) then proceeds to come in dead last on basically every other benchmark (pages 9 to 13).
Not so impressive as you are implying (although it is basically silent and damn cool, apparently, so it's not bad either).
The most interesting thing about these are that the natives of the island have many legends about people exactly fitting this description (three feet tall and humanoid) that are extremely detailed. The legends even include that these 'hobbits' had languages of their own.
First, this would be the first case of modern humans having even psuedo-recorded contact with another intelligent species.
Second, this rips back open the possibility of our faerie tales being more true than most of us would have expected.
Thank you for clearing that up. Now, I can confidently state that EULAs are in fact total bullshit, as opposed to just semi-confidently. Further, I can back it up a bit, which is really useful.
Okay, so it's the biggest in the nation.
Being a huge fan of bigger-dick contests, I'm just wondering what the biggest cellular company in the world is. Is this one it? Anyone know?
I agree with you that EULA's don't make sense, but as devil's advocate...
The consideration on an EULA would be, from the customer, that they lose the right to reverse engineer the product or to tamper with the product, and the consideration from the copyright holder would be permission to copy the game from the disk to the hard-drive.
I don't see where that fails the 'consideration' test, but I also am not a lawyer.
I think you misunderstand significantly. If you ever end up walking down a country road (which usually has no sidewalk) and have a car come at you, you will soon realize that, if they have the brights on YOU CANNOT SEE.
When a car comes at me with brights on, I have to cover my eyes and look down just so I can safely step off the road and wait for it to pass. Even with my hand over my eyes, I can only see my feet because the lights have made them shiny enough to blind me. At most places, the ground is insufficiently reflective so that I cannot see it and am left to hope that I don't step in a ditch or something. It is completely ridiculous.
That's a very misleading measurement. It's been noted many times before that the information AMD released was the max that the processor line would ever reach, not the current max. None of the current x86-64 processors actually hit that 89 watts.
It's even more of a double-standard than that. If you check 3rd Edition D&D, there are several races where women are superior to men, but NONE where men are superior to women. Only discrimination against males is acceptable.*
* I suppose I should note that, in their 'religious pantheons' the men still mostly run the show.
I think the author of the report is correct in many ways, he is far too biased. Besides being clearly in the Linux camp for a long time, he is very deceptive in his explanation of the operating systems. For example, he claims Windows is monolithic by design while Linux is modular by design, citing that you can't unentangle pieces like IE.
However, it is clear that Windows is monolithic in practice and modular by design, as all those pieces actually can be swapped, it just can't be reasonably done because of third-party programs and a lack of replacements.
Linux, by contrast, is designed with a mix of monolithic and modular, with some monolithic components which just don't budge (the Kernel, X) and many which can be swapped to high hell (browsers, desktops, mail readers).
There is a major distinction between being rainy and getting a lot of rainfall. Rainy applies no matter how much is actually coming down and can extend for days without much water actually coming down. However, actually rainfall is an exact matter that can come down over a very short period of time.