It's how much energy you consume vs how much you use which decide if you get fatter, stay the same or thinner.
Not the quality of the food.
10000 kcals of spinach and you will most likely get more fat. 500 kcals from chocolate and you'd lose weight.
Also, while I'm vegan, not all vegetarian food is good food, even less the best food. Omnivores can eat everything so they have a wider selection and can get all the benefits from vegetarian food AND other food.
If I remember correctly there exist(ed?) some extra lockdown thingy, or maybe I just confuse/mix it up with some Linux thing. I don't run OpenBSD nowadays, don't follow it / deadly.org / anything and don't remember.
Guess I may just confuse it with some of the multiple ones for Linux, earlier people used to say that Linux with said patches would be even more locked down than OpenBSD but maybe it have enough functionality on it's own to offer a similar amount of options?
I told in the post where I draw the line, I do see the difference in an OS offering more applications than another one, so I chose to differ on basic required service for things to work as expected vs additional tools which you may or may not need.
It's not like IE will start surfing the web on it's own, very often atleast.
(And then I guess some eventual help system or something such in a different desktop environment may do the same misstake, for instance Songbird for some retarded version include its own browser. Sure, I understand why they thought it was a good idea, I don't however. Got moderated down to hell for mentioning it when he application was discussed thought.)
Well, that depends, personally I care for my files, not my system.
Compromised user account would be more or less as much of a problem for me as root account. I don't want people looking at my information of ruining my files. I don't give much of a shit if my OS breaks down though.
And I assume it may not be trivial to get administrator access in Vista either if you use a non-privileged user? Not that I have any idea whatsoever how Vista works, have never used it, probably never will.
I meant specific software though, like, if you happen to like KDE it's not very likely you will run it on Vista so then a different OS than Vista may happen to be a better alternative for you.
In any case, of course there are reason to not use Vista, say if you are an AROS or Haiku developer you may prefer to run those, of if it's your homeserver you may prefer Solaris.
Locked down? In what way? Sure you can lock down both OpenBSD and Linux with additional patches and what not, but quite functional as is? The standard amount of applications and services may differ though, but then there is the question where you draw the line between OS and applications.
For comparison I'd like to draw it so that OS covers things various applications may use, whereas single applications which don't offer anything for other applications would be just that.
Yeah, but regarding algae for some weird reason spirulina and chlorella is still expensive as hell even though I assume they shouldn't be (grown in ponds instead of the sea though..)
Somewhat related: I heard on TV how grown salmon used up more fish than wild caught since they are feed with fish flour and stuff like that.. Good idea! So people buying grown fish don't help at all, same thing with crabs and stuff like that there like 90% of the things they pull up is thrown back because it's the wrong things, but it all dies anyway. Or fish quotes where they throw back anything they don't like / which is to small wasting even more fish. Animal consumers suck =p, sure, fish is a good food, but people should just accept that they can't eat it because there is way to little.
Snowball earth sounds like a bad scenario indeed. I guess the radioactive "drive" of the earth slows down all the time to, though then the sun may come to help when it starts to expand but..
In any way we're doomed!:D, we need to leave this rock, and find a non-expanding energy to hydrogen universe there new stars light up forever!
I guess you are correct that a hotter climate is more positive in general once life have adjusted. Except maybe for the fact that with costal lines moving you get less ground, and with less ground comes less places to grow crops so then maybe we lose some of the benefits of a hotter climate. Though then once again there is life in the seas to and that would expand instead I assume..
I wonder, if the earth was once all covered with ice, would it then be just cooler and cooler all the time? Would the oceans freeze to the bottom (atleast if it wasn't for radiation and friction from movements in the earth)? Since the snow/ice would likely reflect much of the sunlight.
Slashdot Mirror
In that order?
All I can hear is:
"Natalie portman"
"Eat it!"
"Eat that donut!"
Uhm.. or wait..
I rinsed with chloride to raise my midicloriens count and now I can't hear anything :/
Just in case:
Drinking those kind of silver products is not a good idea. If you think about it, stop.
It's how much energy you consume vs how much you use which decide if you get fatter, stay the same or thinner.
Not the quality of the food.
10000 kcals of spinach and you will most likely get more fat.
500 kcals from chocolate and you'd lose weight.
Also, while I'm vegan, not all vegetarian food is good food, even less the best food. Omnivores can eat everything so they have a wider selection and can get all the benefits from vegetarian food AND other food.
Quite a lot of (teen) vegetarians eat bad.
Don't anger mighty Thor!
If I remember correctly there exist(ed?) some extra lockdown thingy, or maybe I just confuse/mix it up with some Linux thing. I don't run OpenBSD nowadays, don't follow it / deadly.org / anything and don't remember.
Guess I may just confuse it with some of the multiple ones for Linux, earlier people used to say that Linux with said patches would be even more locked down than OpenBSD but maybe it have enough functionality on it's own to offer a similar amount of options?
I told in the post where I draw the line, I do see the difference in an OS offering more applications than another one, so I chose to differ on basic required service for things to work as expected vs additional tools which you may or may not need.
They bent the laws of physics!
No, the laws of physics bent their beliefs in how things should work.
(I was going to write "... bent their theory" but it don't feel appropriate.)
But they don't force you to use it.
It's not like IE will start surfing the web on it's own, very often atleast.
(And then I guess some eventual help system or something such in a different desktop environment may do the same misstake, for instance Songbird for some retarded version include its own browser. Sure, I understand why they thought it was a good idea, I don't however. Got moderated down to hell for mentioning it when he application was discussed thought.)
Hence "not very likely."
Well, that depends, personally I care for my files, not my system.
Compromised user account would be more or less as much of a problem for me as root account. I don't want people looking at my information of ruining my files. I don't give much of a shit if my OS breaks down though.
And I assume it may not be trivial to get administrator access in Vista either if you use a non-privileged user? Not that I have any idea whatsoever how Vista works, have never used it, probably never will.
But Microsoft don't need to since they are big enough for manufacturers to WANT to have their things supported.
Also they don't release a new version every half year, current hardware is quite well supported once they do release a new version.
I meant specific software though, like, if you happen to like KDE it's not very likely you will run it on Vista so then a different OS than Vista may happen to be a better alternative for you.
In any case, of course there are reason to not use Vista, say if you are an AROS or Haiku developer you may prefer to run those, of if it's your homeserver you may prefer Solaris.
You mean as in no cost and not open-source?
Though very much open-source software run on Windows, and I guess sorta almost all would be able to.
Locked down? In what way? Sure you can lock down both OpenBSD and Linux with additional patches and what not, but quite functional as is? The standard amount of applications and services may differ though, but then there is the question where you draw the line between OS and applications.
For comparison I'd like to draw it so that OS covers things various applications may use, whereas single applications which don't offer anything for other applications would be just that.
but it's not going to outrun a Veyron.
But the Veyron won't outrun a BMW M3? .... Or will it? =P
http://www.loaded.se/
There is no reason for a home user to not use Vista on a new machine.
Except if you like free software / prefer those apps or can run OS X.
And you think that way of all OSes? Even ones not from Microsoft?
... and not only because the article isn't about OpenBSD at all.
Anyway, yes, OpenBSD as an OS is probably pretty secure, but so are many others to, but the more crap you pile on top of it the more risk.
Anyway, the OpenBSD people count their "security" (marketing vise atleast) in years since the last remote root(?) exploit.
How likely is a remote root/administrator exploit vs Vista with a software firewall, no extra services and a user which don't do anything? ...
When it comes to exploits vs browsers, mail clients, IM clients, document viewers and such the OS isn't the issue.
Yes, unless you're supposed to go there.
Same as picking up a wallet on a bench and keeping it, it's not yours.
Don't ask me how you're supposed to know this...
Common sense? Works for most of us ..
I can't find the correct Slashdot article, but if I could I would had linked it, anyway:
Engrave it into stone!
Or well, come to think about it, that's already been done in a 1:1 version, with auto-updates and all!
The network is the computer, not the opposite .. :D
Yeah, but regarding algae for some weird reason spirulina and chlorella is still expensive as hell even though I assume they shouldn't be (grown in ponds instead of the sea though ..)
Somewhat related: I heard on TV how grown salmon used up more fish than wild caught since they are feed with fish flour and stuff like that .. Good idea! So people buying grown fish don't help at all, same thing with crabs and stuff like that there like 90% of the things they pull up is thrown back because it's the wrong things, but it all dies anyway. Or fish quotes where they throw back anything they don't like / which is to small wasting even more fish. Animal consumers suck =p, sure, fish is a good food, but people should just accept that they can't eat it because there is way to little.
Snowball earth sounds like a bad scenario indeed. I guess the radioactive "drive" of the earth slows down all the time to, though then the sun may come to help when it starts to expand but ..
In any way we're doomed! :D, we need to leave this rock, and find a non-expanding energy to hydrogen universe there new stars light up forever!
Sorta funny how he speaks bad of the russian military and then ends his post with:
Fearmongering will get us nowhere.
... to.
I guess you are correct that a hotter climate is more positive in general once life have adjusted. Except maybe for the fact that with costal lines moving you get less ground, and with less ground comes less places to grow crops so then maybe we lose some of the benefits of a hotter climate. Though then once again there is life in the seas to and that would expand instead I assume ..
I wonder, if the earth was once all covered with ice, would it then be just cooler and cooler all the time? Would the oceans freeze to the bottom (atleast if it wasn't for radiation and friction from movements in the earth)? Since the snow/ice would likely reflect much of the sunlight.