No, I never said it is a hardware problem. The hardware probably works fine. But the hardware manufacturer has not told anyone apart from a select few *how* exactly one has tointeract with the hardware in order for it to do its wonders. That's quite a different thing.
You are pretending Linux developers to get a crystal ball which will tell them what particular incantations they need to do in order for the hardware to do what's needed... and you do not see how absurd is your demand!
Well, then the problem is with whoever it was that chose those laptops if they intended them to be used with linux. On the other hand, if they were not intended to run Linux, then the problem is with you: you would also be having hard troubles trying to make coffee with your laptop, which isanother thing the people who bought the laptop did not intend you to do.
The fact that you did not get to choose the laptop you are using does not magically make it possible for linux developers to be able to write a driver.
Honestly, after years and years I still am completely unable to understand what reasoning makes it appear sensible to blame linux developers (and distro makers, and so on) for not being able to write a driver which depends in most cases on information which is purposefully withheld from them.
When you shopped for the computer did you take as a parameter the fact that the manufactured was openenough to provide details on how to do suspend to ram to anyone apart from MS?
Reverse polish notation is simply postfix notation, as as such it is not a language---simply a notational convention---Wikipedia has some details. The dc language, which indeed uses a postfix notation, is a fully-fledged language, with control structures, explicit handling of external memory and (rudimentary) IO capabilities.
Speaking as someone whose number of hours using Windows in the last 10 years do not add up to a whole day, and who is not exactly MS's greatest fan: reducing Windows to PowerShell is pretty extreme...
Do you have any file in your computer whose MD5 hash matches the current Google logo?
Of course I am not defending using MD5 hashes as proofs of child porn, leave alone the computation of said hashes without a warrant. I was simply making a claim on the hash algorithm.
What evidence? Some md5 hashes that happen to match hashes from a select number of images? Odds are if we hash out every file on your hard drive we will also find matches to that same list.
I know it is not impossible or impractical. You can write arbitrarily complex code in assembler or actual machine code. I wrote a compiler from (a subset of) Pascal to the language used by dc (see the manpage for dc if you do not know what I am talking about) years ago, which is a Turing complete language...
Honestly, I'd rather not use a compiler/interpreter written by someone who cannot grok the "complexity" of handling unicode properly.
In the same vein, designers of caps-insensitive languages should be banned from using computers, so that's not really an issue...
More seriously: there are quite a few languages which allow Unicode everywhere, and the implementors have not died in the process of getting that done right...
Slashdot Mirror
No, I never said it is a hardware problem. The hardware probably works fine. But the hardware manufacturer has not told anyone apart from a select few *how* exactly one has tointeract with the hardware in order for it to do its wonders. That's quite a different thing.
You are pretending Linux developers to get a crystal ball which will tell them what particular incantations they need to do in order for the hardware to do what's needed... and you do not see how absurd is your demand!
Seriously, dependency hell is something only people that have used linux last time ten years ago can seriously bring up
Or people who use applications that aren't yet widely used.
And whose developers do not care enough about Linux users to package their app for them...
Well, then the problem is with whoever it was that chose those laptops if they intended them to be used with linux. On the other hand, if they were not intended to run Linux, then the problem is with you: you would also be having hard troubles trying to make coffee with your laptop, which isanother thing the people who bought the laptop did not intend you to do.
The fact that you did not get to choose the laptop you are using does not magically make it possible for linux developers to be able to write a driver.
Honestly, after years and years I still am completely unable to understand what reasoning makes it appear sensible to blame linux developers (and distro makers, and so on) for not being able to write a driver which depends in most cases on information which is purposefully withheld from them.
Wireless will work if you use ndiswrapper why should I jump through hoops to use something that should work out of the box?
Because you bought hardware from a manufacturer that seems to think you should?
That's the slashdot equivalent to "lalalalalala".
We are supposed to be impressed that they have finally managed to run an recent OS on 1 gig?
And when you are trying to install a Debian .deb in Windows, talk about dependency hell!
Seriously, dependency hell is something only people that have used linux last time ten years ago can seriously bring up... Let it go.
When you shopped for the computer did you take as a parameter the fact that the manufactured was openenough to provide details on how to do suspend to ram to anyone apart from MS?
That really depends on the particular project the bug is found on.
I blurred the numbers identifying the account and such before posting mine online.
It is sad that things have come to this :(
What do you propose to do about putting more of the monetary cost on those that cannot pay? Reinstate slavery?
Look up the meaning of "dichotomy", and you'll understand the obvious joke you've missed.
You're welcome.
Of course, theso other states have a much better record of telling the truth? How about these WMDs huh?
Reverse polish notation is simply postfix notation, as as such it is not a language---simply a notational convention---Wikipedia has some details. The dc language, which indeed uses a postfix notation, is a fully-fledged language, with control structures, explicit handling of external memory and (rudimentary) IO capabilities.
And it is a triviality to apply a filter to all images you own in order to change the hash under any has algorithm you can come up with...
Can you find a file in your harddrive with the same MD5 hash as the current Google logo?
Your impression is based on your attempts sometime in the 90s. I see. Thanks for sharing it.
Speaking as someone whose number of hours using Windows in the last 10 years do not add up to a whole day, and who is not exactly MS's greatest fan: reducing Windows to PowerShell is pretty extreme...
Do you have any file in your computer whose MD5 hash matches the current Google logo?
Of course I am not defending using MD5 hashes as proofs of child porn, leave alone the computation of said hashes without a warrant. I was simply making a claim on the hash algorithm.
What evidence? Some md5 hashes that happen to match hashes from a select number of images? Odds are if we hash out every file on your hard drive we will also find matches to that same list.
Actually, odds are the hashes will not match...
The people that for 8 years let the situation come to this?
Oh. That is just very, very sad ;-)
I know it is not impossible or impractical. You can write arbitrarily complex code in assembler or actual machine code. I wrote a compiler from (a subset of) Pascal to the language used by dc (see the manpage for dc if you do not know what I am talking about) years ago, which is a Turing complete language...
My point is, it is not desirable to code in PHP.
It is not really that good of a hoax. The argumentations are really poor, and anyone with three live neurons can see through it.
That IDers have been so successfull (in the US) means little more that the people they have managed to convince are dumb.
Honestly, I'd rather not use a compiler/interpreter written by someone who cannot grok the "complexity" of handling unicode properly.
In the same vein, designers of caps-insensitive languages should be banned from using computers, so that's not really an issue...
More seriously: there are quite a few languages which allow Unicode everywhere, and the implementors have not died in the process of getting that done right...